Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Download.com Features Linux Distro 144

Posted by Roblimo from the we-knew-they'd-come-around-someday dept.
Morpheous writes "C|Net Download.Com is showcasing Armed Linux, which apparently is similar to WinLinux 2000 (it runs on top of Windows). Unfortunately, the website doesn't give too many details, except that they are attempting to create the "easiest" to use distro of Linux yet."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Download.com Features Linux Distro More

Download.com Features Linux Distro

Comments Filter:
  • Then check to see where "unmovable" sectors are located. If there are some near the end, you can't repartition or Wincrap will break.

    C:\> attrib -H -R -S /s
  • It can allow people who are afraid of Linux to use it without the worry of losing existing data, partitioning, etc. Something to help a windows user realize what they are actually missing. Something that will let windows users use a FULL EXT2 Linux system, without going through any hassle and get up and running quickly. You might even call it a Training Linux. One thing that there is NONE of out there, is a Linux distro for windows users, to actually aid in the Migration to Linux.
  • I host 2 site with half price. They use SUSE and apache with php and mod perl. Im not sure why they did not go with that. I have talked with there lead unix systems guy and he seams very nice.
    --
    Joshua Curtis
    Lancaster Co. Linux Users Group
  • One reason why UMSDOS is better than a loopback filesystem is that these are average users here. So chances are, the FAT filesystem is fragmented badly. This means that the loopback swap/ext2 filesystem will be fragmented too, and therefore slower than UMSDOS.

    Of course, this problem isn't apparent to most people who can create a distro, because they defrag regularly. It has tradeoffs of course, like needing more space. I agree that the loopback device is the "right" way of doing things, but UMSDOS isn't that bad, and gets the job done better in a lot of cases for the kind of user this distro is aimed at.
  • > Intrestingly enough if you look up MSN.com on Netcraft you get this. Well at least we know M$N isn't doing that well if they can run a server off of Win95.

    Yes, but even more interestingly the MAIN site [netcraft.com] uses Win95 too!
  • fusiongyro sez:
    I don't have a problem with people learning to use Linux. I have a problem with everyone trying to make life simple for the users, because that's just going to invite them to come in and stomp all over what we've made so far. There is a difference between teaching users, and catering to them. We have to draw a line.

    You are obviously not in the business of building computer systems for end-users, or you'd realize just how ridiculous you sound.

    Are computers toys for hackers ... or are computers just tools for end-users? As much as I enjoy the toy factor, I am painfully aware of how end-users are impacted by closed systems such as Windows, with all that implies (we need not retread those arguments here).

    My objective in supporting Linux is to have an OS that can be used in a corporate environment, with a much smaller total-cost-of-ownership, and reasonable support requirements. Now, Windows ain't gonna go away, but Linux has a shot at occupying a big chunk of the corporate market.

    In other words, I'm not supporting Linux because I think Torvalds is cool and open source is cool and I like being part of a subculture and, oh yeah, Microsoft is evil; I'm actually supporting Linux because it's better for people.

    And I'm sorry, but in the real world, easy-to-use is a big part of that, too.

    Your "let's keep Linux arcane and difficult so the masses don't find out about it" argument is juvenile. As far as I'm concerned, Linux advocacy does not need people like you. You don't "love Linux"; you love being part of the Linux subculture, and you want to keep it exclusionary and secretive. You're part of the problem. Please stop.
  • DHartung wrote:
    > My objective in supporting Linux is to have an OS that can be used in a corporate
    > environment, with a much smaller total-cost-of-ownership, and reasonable support
    > requirements. Now, Windows ain't gonna go away, but Linux has a shot at occupying a big
    > chunk of the corporate market.

    Well, that's not my objective. My objective is to have something that works better for me on my home system. Clearly, we have different points of view, for different circumstances.

    My article was designed to get people thinking. It was intentional. I don't want to see Linux turn into Windows--by which I mean, I want it to stay fast, pretty, and somewhat arcane.

    > I'm actually supporting Linux because it's better for people.

    ? How is any OS better for anyone? According to your argument, as long as it is usable, it is good. Why is Windows not good enough for *YOU*?

    > In other words, I'm not supporting Linux because I think Torvalds is cool and open source
    > is cool and I like being part of a subculture and, oh yeah, Microsoft is evil; I'm
    > actually supporting Linux because it's better for people.

    Where do you get this? I don't see the word "cool" anywhere in my article. For that matter, I didn't mention open source or Linus Torvaldes. Or the "subculture". Now, I will admit that I do greatly agree, Linus is cool, and so is open source. I like being a part of the subculture. But that's not what I'm trying to protect. I think Linux is just a better system.

    > Your "let's keep Linux arcane and difficult so the masses don't find out about it"
    > argument is juvenile. As far as I'm concerned, Linux advocacy does not need people like
    > you. You don't "love Linux"; you love being part of the Linux subculture, and you want to
    > keep it exclusionary and secretive. You're part of the problem. Please stop.

    Why is my argument juvenile? What is wrong with savoring something and not having to force everyone to use it? I assure you, I do love Linux. I patrol various Linux-related newsgroups to help newbies get acqainted with the system. I certainly don't want Linux to be exclusionary or secretive. I just don't think that condescension should be part of the system. And I think that having uneducated users is certainly going to push the system in that direction.

    And how can you argue with that? A properly configured Linux system with an administrator is just as capable of userfriendliness now as it was two or more years ago. Sure, it may look more like Windows now, and it may have prettier themes, and it may have filemanagers, but what do these really add? If you are using it as a graphics workstation, what do you REALLY need to be able to do, besides launch the program and copy the files around? Or get email? And I don't think that GNOME or KDE really change that, from a corporate perspective.

    Furthermore, I'd like to know what the "problem" here is. Linux was made by hackers not too different from myself for themselves. It was not made to be a "[small] total-cost-of-ownership solution [with] reasonable support requirements". How can the creators be themselves the problem, if their system is so glorious?

    FusionGyro
  • I know Linus Torvalds made the OS for his own personal use, and I wasn't pointing at that at all. What I was pointing at was the people who bash MS for making Windows "an OS for dummies", and kept saying "Linux is the ONLY viable option, use this or be lame". It's not, it's for the technical person (me included, soon) who likes to fiddle with things. Not JRL who doesn't know a CDROM from a disk drive.

    And give me one reason for flaming you for your opinion... there isn't one, it's your opinion (it's also what I mean). Chill, dude.. not everybody like to flame needlessly :)


    -m

    99 little bugs in the code,
    99 bugs in the code,
    fix one bug, compile it again...

  • Re:At last? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This does not run under windows! Please get your fact straight. Musta been a slackware user who posted this article. ALl it does it create a link to your desktop you click on the uses loadlin to load linux, windows is gone after that.. poof disapear!
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • ...can I assume this is pronounce "Ar-mhed"?

    Otherwise it sounds like some high crypto/security release:

    "Man, you're not running *BSD; from my perspective, you're a security risk."
    "No way dude, my Linux box is ARMED!

  • At last; a Linux distro that runs ontop of Windoze ...

    WHY ????

    Is this really being sold as an advancement ?

    VMWare I like, so I can open Windoze on top of Linux to play games. Retain the strength of Linux as the underlying OS and still have the flexability to play with all the mainstreet pap.

    I say again WHY ?
  • ...to exterminate all linux users.

    #include xfiles.h

    Let's see.. it's a linux distro that behaves with windows... to learn more about it (what.asp [armed.net]), you come to a page with cute women -- the graphic is entitled 'chick.gif', for goodness' sake!

    Are they really just using sex appeal to lure people over to the dark side, never to return? ;)


    Incidentally, I know I've seen that graphic elsewhere before. Anyone know what it's from?
  • I have tried Armed Linux. It is not my cup of tea, but it seems to be a decent distro, with a clever "integration" with windoze.

    I don't know if what kind of server a distros site is on is really a great criterion on which to judge the distro.

    Their point seems to be "integration" with windows, so why not run on windows?

    I think that the are probably on some web hosting companies non-dedicated server, and that the decision was a busines decision, not a technical one.

    Are we to become FUDmeisters ourselves?

    -Peter
  • I installed this the other day to see if it lived up to the hype...

    Frankly I had a hell of a time with it all around. It had a kernal panic attack nearly everytime I tried to boot it. Also, it was unable to find my nic card or my scsi card... Wee, fun.

    Bah. I'm sticking with Redhat.

  • Easy to use Linux Distros. (Score:4)

    by Surak ( 18578 ) <surak&mailblocks,com> on Thursday September 30, 1999 @03:03PM (#1646838) Homepage Journal
    [soapbox-mode ON]
    What's so bad about them? Because the run UMSDOS, which is slow? Because users don't have to tinker with cryptic config files?

    My first distro was Slackware. I set it up on a UMSDOS to try it out (because I didn't want to have to wipe out "working" system...little did I suspect that my machine wasn't working half as well it does now :) Even then, it was still hard: I had to manually configure everything. Now its easier. So what?

    Myself, I compare this my online experiences. When I first started out online, I had to figure out how to configure cryptic terminal emulator packages like ProComm (not even PLUS!) and learn silly things like baud rate, parity, stop bits. I had to learn to use download and upload protocols. I had to configure my offline mail reader with an ASCII text file (BlueWave). Later, when I setup my own BBS, I had to learn goofy things like FOSSIL drivers and mailer frontend software.

    Then comes along things like Prodigy and AOL and they RUIN EVERYTHING. Now anyone and their mother can get online with point and click.

    So what? It means more people get to be online. It means that people who don't care about computers the way hackers do, people who use comptuers as a TOOL can finally get to enjoy the things that we have come to enjoy.

    The same holds true for Linux. If point and click installation programs that install the thing non-destructively on Windows boxes is what it takes for Linux to reach critical mass, SO BE IT. It means that Linux will get used by a wider audience and the community will grow. People will see why we like Linux so much, and maybe they'll switch to a full Red Hat or Debian distribution. Maybe they'll toss out Windows, and if enough people do that, so long Microsoft, so long Windows. The world will be a better place.

    [end soapbox mode]

  • At last? (Score:1)

    by rde ( 17364 )
    A distro that installs under windows? Wow. Phat Linux [phatlinux.com] has run off a windows partition for, oh, ages.
  • Slackware has supported UMSDOS installs since at least 3.5, probably before.

    Mandrake has always, as far as I know, supported an install to a loopback file, which is actually a bit better than UMSDOS for rather obvious reasons.

    There are TONS of other distributions like this, what makes this one so special?
  • Check out the Armed Linux Website It looks... Weird. Why haven't we heard about this distro before? Who are these people? Why are they running ASP files? Why are all these hip-looking models looking up at me in a plunging shot? Why? Why??

    "There is no surer way to ruin a good discussion than to contaminate it with the facts."

  • On the FAQ-page the last question:

    Q: Why ASP pages?
    A: They are quick, easy, and will run on Linux now! We use PERL too.

    Why, then, do I get a page looking like:

    Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '8007000e'

    [Microsoft][ODBC Microsoft Access Driver] System resource exceeded.

    /forums/default.asp, line 11

    when I go to the page http://www.armed.net/forums/default.asp [armed.net] (update before I could post this. It now says "Sorry, temporarily offline due to the Slashdot effect." ;). Also NetCraft [netcraft.com] says it "is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4 or Windows 98".

    I guess the word 'will' is an important word here. Personally I don't trust an OS (or in this case a distribution) whose web server is not running on it. (I've heard some Microsloth sites are running Linux. Anybody got any facts on this?)
  • On the FAQ-page the last question:

    Q: Why ASP pages?
    A: They are quick, easy, and will run on Linux now! We use PERL too.

    Why, then, do I get a page looking like:

    Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '8007000e'

    [Microsoft][ODBC Microsoft Access Driver] System resource exceeded.

    /forums/default.asp, line 11

    when I go to the page http://www.armed.net/forums/default.asp [armed.net] (update before I could post this. It now says "Sorry, temporarily offline due to the Slashdot effect." ;). Also NetCraft [netcraft.com] says it "is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4 or Windows 98".

    I guess the word 'will' is an important word here. Personally I don't trust an OS (or in this case a distribution) whose web server is not running on it. (I've heard some Microsloth sites are running Linux. Anybody got any facts on this?)
  • It looks to me like another company just trying to make a quick dollar. I wonder how many more of these we are going to see trying to use the linux name to make a profit. There is just something about their web site that makes them seem kind of seedy, but then again I tend not to trust anyone who thinks running anything on a M$ platform is a good idea. Just looks like a bunch of marketers got together and decided with the recent good fortune of anything with the word linux in it on the stock market, that they would like a piece of the pie also. I don't like it and like I said, I can see a lot more similar companys/products in the future.
  • If you have to emulate an OS at least do it the right way around and run 98 and/or NT on vmware for linux?

    Stable, powerful base OS and protection from virii too.

  • uhhmm. not exactly true. it works with any Windows registered script language. VBScript, JavaScript, or Perl name name three. ;^P

    Yes. even on the server-side.

  • have seen that pictures somewhere before?

    hrmmm ... I might have as well, but to refuse to say where for the risk of incrimidating myself

    *grin*
  • I concur, even if I can't spell. I am very much afraid that making linux as user-friendly and newbie-friendly as possible jeapordises linux. I would worry that if linux had the userbase of windows, that it would degrade to the quality of windows. (No I'm not biased. :) .)

    I use the CLI (or CLUE if you will) for everything, and only on rare occasions I'll zip into X to start up real audio or some such. (Right now I'm actually on a bona fide vt100 terminal, but anyway).
  • two words to describe their target audience ... script kiddies ... adolescent males who dont' get out to much, don't fit in with their peers, but want to be 'l33t' after watching 'hackers'
  • This is pure evil! Slick ASP web pages! Just Unzip into Windows directory! How can can this be!!

    Danger Danger Will Robinson

    Does anyone know who these guys are? Is this a case of a hidden dagger from Microsoft? What is this register your software crap on the web page!

    Why do they have nonsense like:

    Linux, a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds, has been released to the public domain.

    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I don't see any source code, either.
  • There are TONS of other distributions like this, what makes this one so special?

    Ah, simply that fact that it is?

    Okay, so Armed Linux *doesn't* do anything more then some of the other Distro's do that allow you to use a fat partition to install Linux on. But remember, first thing is that download.com can't list *every* like software package. They listed one, that's cool. Someone probably let them know about that distro and they thought it was cool. They probably don't even *know* that there are others that do the same thing. After all that is largely an ungrasped concept in the Windows world. 3 different versions of Linux that all do the same thing? WoW! Perhaps if that bothers you, you could drop them a kind e-mail pointing out the other similar distributions. Or maybe they did know about the others and chose this one as the best for their site. WinLinux' FTP site has been swamped the last few days, that probably cuts them out for a link on download.com.

    -Brent
    --
  • How many more distributions are there going to be? I hope the Linux Standard Base is out and all the new distros follow it. Prakash http://www.freeos.com
  • Let me first state that if you don't love linux, don't read this post. You're going to get pissed off.

    I'd like to know what the rush is to make everyone use Linux. I wasn't online before it became so simple, but I can tell you, since then we've had to deal with a host of new problems. For example, people who post nothing but flamebait, morons, script kiddies, and spam. From what I understand, these things were not nearly so commonplace before it became this easy.

    What are the things that make Linux shine? Eveyrone contributes. It's extremely fast and powerful. Moreover, we love it.

    The average Windows user is not equipped to deal with Linux. That's just a fact. The question is, why do we want to ruin the things that make Linux so great? As soon as we start making EVERYTHING simple to use, EVERYONE will start using it. The complexity of it will grow to insane levels. It will no longer be within the capabilities of the average hacker to program for it. And as all of these levels of simplification stack higher and higher, they will place more and more of a burden on the system.

    Translation: Linux becomes as awful as Windows. Linux users migrate to FreeBSD.

    It's a fate I don't want to see. I think we need to make something clear: Linux is for elitists. If you aren't willing to learn to use it, you aren't worthy of the title. It's just that simple.

    I don't have a problem with people learning to use Linux. I have a problem with everyone trying to make life simple for the users, because that's just going to invite them to come in and stomp all over what we've made so far.

    There is a difference between teaching users, and catering to them. We have to draw a line.

    FusionGyro
  • >I've heard some Microsloth sites are running Linux. Anybody got any facts on this?

    I can't say that any of them run Linux, but if your looks at Netcraft readings for Hotmail.com [netcraft.com] it shows they are running FreeBSD.

    Intrestingly enough if you look up MSN.com on Netcraft you get this [netcraft.com]. Well at least we know M$N isn't doing that well if they can run a server off of Win95.

  • Alright, this is kind of redundant, but I might as well say what I see. I guess that's what you get from being an anthro major turned computer fan... First thing I did after going to armed.net was go on over to What is Armed Linux" [armed.net]. Cute girl, designer pose. Wow! If I wasn't already already a junkie I might give it a whirl.

    Look at the site design. That's pretty hip, yet concise. Perhaps a bit too sparse on detail, agreed. Then again, their site is crawling right now... I haven't checked it all out yet. What I noticed was that it's very unlike most open source sites (well, apart from Raster, /. and a few others). First of all, the site looks designed for the Gap generation. A picture out of Friends almost. Or, to put it bluntly, clearly aimed at pop culture. /., the lpd project, hell, RH, gnome, kde, etc. are all much more designed to keep us more typical linux/open source users happy with news, software, toys...

    I find this stuff interesting, the sort of cultural differences online and to sort of see an example of the meshing of the two is an example of what might come in the next few years. People are hearing about Linux in the news. Some are curious. But most already tackled the basic learning curve of Windoze and that's all they know. Now they're promised a safe route through installation that promises not to touch windoze, and then they have a dual boot with little hassle, or so they're promised. That's what a lot of people want, something that doesn't threaten them.

    So, as I see it, it's just another marketing approach to distribute a product. I don't know anything about the people behind the distro. I plan on finding some out if possible. But if they're aiming to be a consumer distro, I feel you can see where they're aiming. Not the distro for me or the servers I play with, but some people targetting a new market. RH might be doing quite well in the news and market, but they're still aiming for the more tech oriented than most users out there.

    I can't wait until the next round in the drive for the consumer market. We've got Corel coming in as well now. Each with a different marketing approach. Armed seems to really be aiming for the home user, and that alone.

    Just a few of my ramblings...

  • Here you are:
    http://www.iarchitect.com/mshame.htm [iarchitect.com]

    This should be required reading for all software developers.

    The sections devoted to Win95 are:
    Common File Dialogs [iarchitect.com]
    Explorer [iarchitect.com]
    Find Applet [iarchitect.com]
  • a) It's not emulation, for goodness' sake

    b) vmware is not proven for testing purposes; it could *fix* bugs in real installations, not necessarily just introducing more of the old 'windoze is unstable' crap.

    c) if it's windoze, it's more virus-prone than linux, whether you run the sucker in vmware or not.
  • Ahem... I know it is being a little nit-picky, but isn't the formal definition of public domain significantly different from the GNU GPL? It would seem as if the people marketing this need a little course in Linux 101.

    But of course. Public domain means "without copyright". The GPL is clearly a copyright license (though we like to call it copyleft, for obvious reasons ;). Public domain is about as useful to me as BSD- or X-style licensing (more or less).

    And who ever said marketing people were clued in? Have you seen the commercials on TV lately? In simpler times, such things were meant as vehicles to sell products. Nowadays.. I don't know.. I just don't know.. =P

  • If it really is Microsoft I suspect they would've ensured that the hosting company had removed the sample files from IIS/4.0 as advised on the relevant security pages relating to that product.
    See l0pht advisory dated 05/07/99 (mm/dd/yy).
  • The thing about this that I don't get is why would anyone WANT to run Linux on a Windows partition? With all of the cool partition utilities out there, why not just reduce the size of the Win partition and then install Red Hat with some cool LILO action. It is so friggin easy and hard disk space has never been so cheap...
  • I have a real problem when things like *nix start to be available to 11yr old script kiddie AOL hackers. Its somewhat like handing bullets to monkies that just have an empty gun. Also, if it is such a good product, and so stable, and so powerful blah blah blah, then why are they using NT on their server, not their own software?

    --
    BlackSpyder
  • Whoa... the woman on this page [armed.net] the the same woman plastered all over my school's walls on posters advertising an upcoming dance. Weird. Probably clipart or something.

    Jeff Higgins
    www.hal9000.cc
  • I don't see why this post is moderated down. I mean, seriously, how can you even begin to trust a company that sells a Linux distribution, and doesn't even use it to run their own web server? And then you get "HTTP/1.1 server too busy" errors when you try to access their pages, too! The very least a company that believes in its products can do is USE THEM. Linux makes a great webserver, and these people use NT and IIS? As far as I care, that's the ultimate sign of hopping on the Linux bandwagon without caring the least bit for the whole process that Linux is part of. Companies like Corel seem to be getting the idea of what it is to make a Linux for non-linuxers while keeping the right attitude. Armed Linux sure don't look like they do.
  • my feelings exactly. it's shiny on the surface, but it looks rather weird when you start noticing these things. a distro that noone has even heard of, with a hip-looking homepage on an NT server that keeps returning "server too busy" when you try to access its contents, and suddently featured on a big site like download.com?
  • UMSDOS? oh yuck. why don't they put their root on a loopback mounted large file in the vfat partition? I'd definitely do it that way if I had to install Linux on Windows w/o repartitioning.
  • these guys are really funny, with their server too busy message
  • "Oh, so I can try out linux without full committment."...

    ..."Alright, I downloaded it, ran the installer, clicked the icon and now I'm trying out linux."...

    ..."Hey, this linux stuff is swell, I'm really enjoying it and I read about how it's actually running slower because it's using UMSDOS...I'll just wipe my drive and start from scratch!"...

    ..."um, where'd that installer icon go?"...

    ...thud.

    Perhaps more effort should be spent on making feature-complete distributions that exist on a cd for demos and evaluation, and just all around more robust and intuitive (or at least informative*) linux-native installers. The idea is interesting, but if the FUD-wranglers are right about linux support being sparse, psychotic hybrid win95/linux installations aren't going to make things any easier. I'm not as concerned about linux doing weird things to windows, I'd just hate to see things like "Ever since I installed IE5.1, my 'Reboot to Linux' icon just spawns a window with the microsoft website..."

    -transiit

    * informative - without giving a full lecture at each step of an installation, how will a new user decide if they want package foo? (or for that matter, foo-development)
  • Just Try http://homepages.msn.com/bogus [msn.com] Apache on Solaris, as reported from Netcraft [netcraft.com]

  • Yup (Score:3)

    by Wah ( 30840 ) on Thursday September 30, 1999 @07:22PM (#1646887) Homepage Journal
    I went to buy a new NIC tonight at Best Buy (I should really stay away from that place) and asked a very helpful customer service agent if any of the NICs supported Linux. "Gosh, nobody done asked us that before." Finally I find one that says in black on green letters "Linux." Oh, yeah, the point? The guy behind me in the aisle was looking for a PCMCIA(NSA) card for his laptop, seems he wanted to get a bit more life out of it, using Linux. He was about 46 bald, greying and wanting to learn what everybody is talking about. Young and old, theeey'rrree heeerrrreee.
  • They will learn, the hard way. They'll boot it up, panic, then go back to mr gates.
  • I installed Armed linux after I read a post last week dealing with WinLinux. It installs from the DOS prompt. It is based on Red Hat from teh nearest I can imagine. It sets up everything (mounting file systems and all that) without the user. Then it goes to a nice graphical interface to set up mouse, keyboard, video etc. That of course didn't work for me for some odd reason because it wouldn't boot into the system. So i ran x86config and set everything up and it worked fine. The video was still really bad, but I couldn't find my exact monitor specs and I think that was the problem. This is my second linux install. I installed RedHat early this summer and this install was no easier. The only problem I had last time was getting the video to work and that is my same problem now. So I guess what I am saying is that from a newbie standpoint this install was no easier than the real one. And Armed Linux has a very slimed down version red hat, it is missing some software. So overall, I don't recommend it.
  • Oh dear.

    Linux, a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds, has been released to the public domain.

    Ahem... I know it is being a little nit-picky, but isn't the formal definition of public domain significantly different from the GNU GPL? It would seem as if the people marketing this need a little course in Linux 101.

    I must say, it is alright to see these Linux-as-Windows-apps distributions showing up -- it may kindle a flame with those who would otherwise run screaming from having to do a real install. The problem is they will never get the TRUE (and IMHO-better) Linux experience until they take the plundge, split their windums partition (or scrap it altogether ;-), and do a "standard" #include install.

    At least it may interest (and educate) several to go 'all the way'!
    --
    You're still using Windows?


  • There used to be a public microsoft.com host running Linux. It was a standard chestnut on /. around the time of the Haloween documents.

    (I think it was a news server or something. Nothing that exciting.)
  • This probably isn't going to be the most popular distribution amongst the high school crowd after the incidents in Colorado and Alberta this year...

    I can just imagine guidance counsellors noticing that Little Johnny is taking interest in something that is, um, apparently related to weapons...

  • c|Net, the parent company of download.com, is quite aware of Linux.

    Regular slashdot readers know that the company has acquired Searchlinux and it's now available as http://linux.cnet.com

    Take a look, download.com is for the masses, an entry-level site that generally attracts windows users. On the other hand, linux.cnet.com is for more technically inclined users.

    I think they made the right choice by spotlighting a user-friendly installation distribution. It's enough to get your feet wet. I ran a UMSDOS version of slack 3 back in '96 (or possibly earlier, can't remember!) and it was insanely slow, but usable.
    -- Leonid S. Knyshov
    Network Administrator
  • I wonder if HTTP/1.1 Server Too Busy is some kind of primitive greeting from Windows NT... :)

    Anyhow, I ran DOSLinux at work for a while and the initial install was okay, but then I added the Slack package for X, and tried to do stuff, and realized how *slow* UMSDOS is.

    Therefore, I ended up sticking /usr in a file and mounting it loopback. I actually saved some space, since ext2 stores files so much better than FAT16 does. :)

    Oh, and whenever I install Linux as an option on someone's Windows machine, I never install lilo, and always install loadlin as a Windows icon called 'Linux' that asks if you want to go to MS-DOS mode. ;) I mean, you don't want to confuse people or anything...
  • Maybe it's because most people (me included, I admit, I haven't dug deep into linux yet, just fiddled with it) don't know wtf "loopback mounted large file" means. Some may even look at the words "vfat partition" and go "wtf?".

    Not everybody is (or want to be) totally IN when it comes to computers, just like when it comes to cars. Who wants to know how a piston engine works, let alone how it LOOKS...

    Some people just want to USE a computer, yet they want to try out linux. That means ease of use above security. If they were to run this server on a mission-critical and/or oft-targeted box, they would have more sense than run linux on UMSDOS. The point here is that the people who try linux this way, use this as a possible starting point, to LEARN linux without the first hassle often associated with installing linux.

    For that matter, would you prefer to use a computer via DIP switches, like they did in the 50's? I seriously doubt that.

    People assume too easily that other people know exactly what they know, and everything is SO easy. Remember that people still mistake the CD-ROM for a coffee cup-holder. Stuff must be made easy enough so that a complete newbie can use it, the hard-core group which dedicate their whole life to hacking away at the computer is NOT someone to look for in userability testing.

    -m

    99 little bugs in the code,
    99 bugs in the code,
    fix one bug, compile it again...

  • It's a pity they couldn't use Linux for their Web server. Looks like the site is overloaded:

    HTTP/1.1 Server Too Busy


    -- Paul Gillingwater

  • I ask "why not?". Nothing wrong with this. It means you get yet another choice when it comes to how to run your box (choice is good, mmkay?), and it's gimmicky.

    Let's not forget it's easier than setting up a complete new linux box, so newbies can learn Linux easier, and they can move on to more advanced linuxes later on. There's no need to shove the whole kit and kaboodle into their laps all at once, when all they want to do is try it out.

    OS's... Some like to call Windows Windoze (it IS slow at times, I'll admit that... linux IS a slicker OS) or Winblowz (that's intelligent...), yet they forget something... not everybody like to get their hands dirty with all the greasy stuff under the bonnet (compile the kernel, f.x.), and windows is aimed at them. MS may claim it's secure and all that, but it isn't as secure as Linux.

    They both serve different purposes, yet people tend to treat them just like any religion, i.e. linux is the ONLY way to go, or Windows is the only way to go. Both are wrong, but people continually refuse to see this. *sigh* fanatics.

    News on MS.com: Winux!

    -m

    99 little bugs in the code,
    99 bugs in the code,
    fix one bug, compile it again...

  • In fact it's quite simple to run Linux under Windoze (at least, Windows NT 4.0), and vice versa -- simply install VMWare. [vmware.com] It's easy to install, seems stable and provides most of the functionality needed for both platforms. I even persuaded my boss to install Corel Linux on his NT machine once he saw how easy it was!
    -- Paul Gillingwater
  • Naw, Real Programmers use the force to flip the bits on the HD's themselves.

    Trust the force, Luke.

    -m

    99 little bugs in the code,
    99 bugs in the code,
    fix one bug, compile it again...

  • You're SURE you want to use an easy OS like Linux then? Sure you don't want to go back to the 1950 mainframes, where you had lamps and switches to flick?

    It's nice to have your own policy when it comes to what OS you choose (and how you perceive it should be), but don't enforce that on others.

    -m

    99 little bugs in the code,
    99 bugs in the code,
    fix one bug, compile it again...

  • All the fuss over Armed & Winlinux...
    Peanut already does it better. Phat is O.K. but IIRC does not give you the option of installing to an ex2 partition. Peanut's got KDE, Nav 4.61 Kernel 2.2.12, X 3.3.5, latest libs & much more -
    Faster too! (he sez :)). You can install it in a DOS loop (unsure of the details but NOT UMSDOS)or do a true ex2 partition (FIPS included). All in a 48MB .bz + 5MB .zip. Fast download - mirrored @ linuxberg + site not /.ed. Good support on the message board. This was the first distro I tried & it is the one I'm using now (can't get COL 2.2 to work with my Vchip :o) the homepage
    http://metalab.unc.edu/peanut/
    is worth checking out just for the humor....

  • Already? (Score:1)

    by NtG ( 61481 )
    8 replies to the post and I am already getting: HTTP/1.1 Server Too Busy
  • I really think people should remember what
    Linux Torvalds made this OS for: His own personal
    use. He's a very technical person. Bloated GUIs
    were added later. I sort of like the idea of
    giving windows or Be to the unwashed masses, then
    let those who *like* to fiddle enjoy Linux, *BSD,
    Tru64 etc. Just my opinion, but you'll flame me
    anyhow.
  • I'm very sorry for double posting this message. The line to slashdot was really sticky and at times I had absolutely no idea whether the message had got posted or not.

    Sorry...
  • They want to be the "easiest" distribution.. but they aren't using KDE (or even GNOME)?

    I dunno who their beta testers have been but the newbies *I* know would freak out having to use WindowMaker or Enlightenment on their own...

  • What makes Armed and WinLinux different (Score:5)

    by KMSelf ( 361 ) <karsten@linuxmafia.com> on Thursday September 30, 1999 @01:18PM (#1646909) Homepage

    These are Linux distros with Windows-based installation programs. That's the novel feature -- the installation is like any other Windows program. Simplified transition for the newbie.

    Both distros also run on UMSDOS (the Unix on DOS file system), a feature which has been around for ages. It means that you don't need to repartition or create filesystems to run Linux (it also means you can blow away Linux from within Windows or DOS).

    Neither distro "runs on top of" windows in an executable sense. You get a dual-boot system. You choose, either, or. But both installation and execution (icon-based launcher) are streamlined.

    These aren't power-user systems, they're introductory packages for getting Linux to the masses. Realize that a tool is a tool, and there are different tools for different problems. I think it's a neat concept. I probably won't install it myself (I'd have to go out and buy Windows first ....).

  • What these distros really provide is gee-whiz installation scripts.

    Okay folks, its been done, move on.

    What about ease of adminstration? Better integration of mutlimedia? etc. etc.

  • Desperately Seeking Mirrors (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Folks on the message boards have been frothing at the mouth over their inability to get and try WinLinux2000, whose FTP has been slashdotted to hell for two weeks now. If anyone has the inside track to a mirror host that can handle the traffic (it's a 150 MB+ .zip file), I know both the WinLinux team and us eager WinLin wanters would be grateful. Drop them a note at info@winlinux.net. For a look at the pissing and moaning the pent-up demand is causing, check out the stop.at/winlinux or stop.at/phatlinux message boards. (Yeah, the URLs look funny, but they're typed correctly.) Apparently WinLinux put in all the ordinary desktop stuff and left out a lot of hackmaster tools. All these Linux-under-DOS systems create a huge .IMG file in your DOS partition which reads as a loopback device when you run Linux. They say this is fifferent from UMSDOS. Is that right?
  • I did a umsdos install with my first slackware install back in 1995. This was before slackware three came out because I remember getting fed up waiting for slack to come with 2.0.x and got debian instead. Never looked back :)
  • great more point-and-click linux.
    i bitched about this in a previous post and i still disagree with it!
    maybe im afraid if all the users can slack off with "easy linux interfaces" then our future linux programmers will do! that would be horrible!

    now sure i agree with the point: you can always do something in different ways, not neccisarily point-and-click.

    maybe my opinion on this has to do with the fact i refuse to use X. console all the way! im just old fashioned i guess

    tyler
  • it was egg.microsoft.com I don't know if it's still up though.
  • Well, now that Linux had gathered enough momentum to make it into a viable business venture, it was just a matter of time that Linux is made for the masses. An install that allows Win savy users to back out if something goes wrong is very appealing. Looks at the flip side, if the Win install version can hook just 1% of those who download it, they will eventually trash it, and get a real distro and become contributing members of the community. I see it as a teaser. "Here is what you could have...."

    The battle for the desktop is some of the most valuable real estate in the world. M$ owns a good chunk of it, and right now, Linux has the worlds ear. Can it show it's true grit?

    Money is to be made in markets that will never serve a single web page or dole out DNS entries to hungry browsers. The home user. The users who just learned Win9x and feel it is time to move on to new challenges
  • That would be radical !

    Install vmware on the wintendo machine, and install linux on the virutal machine. Add an option to migrate the linux installation to run native when you are penguinified ....

    Not that I whuld use such crap ....

  • All i wanted to do was check this out but no! damm "http server to busy" error, ow well doesnt really look good for them if there webserver cant even handle /.
  • You are awesome. I have been looking for this since last year.

  • Now, when I went to look at armed.net's site, I got the main page, but all subsequent links I followed gave me a 'Server Busy' error. So I looked at their server - and They're running IIS!

    I don't know how much I'd trust a linux distribution when the distributor won't even use it!
    Webmaster, City of Saint Paul

  • Now, when I went to look at armed.net's site, I got the main page, but all subsequent links I followed gave me a 'Server Busy' error. So I looked at their server - and They're running IIS!

    I don't know how much I'd trust a linux distribution when the distributor won't even use it!


    Webmaster, City of Saint Paul
  • I'd like to know what the rush is to make everyone use Linux. I wasn't online before it became so simple, but I can tell you, since then we've had to deal with a host of new problems. For example, people who post nothing but flamebait, morons, script kiddies, and spam. From what I understand, these things were not nearly so commonplace before it became this easy.

    flames existed as did flamebait. morons existed. script kiddies didn't exist, but hackers and the occasional cracker did exist. And spam was essentially unheard of.

    Is the net a better place since the floodgates opened? In my opinion, a guarded "yes". The web's exponential growth has allowed the technophile to more efficiently access information. The small percentage of useful people coming through the gates includes some good programmers who have helped build better systems. The presence of moronic script kiddies has given me an excuse to build a solid firewall and learn about defects in routing protocols and TCP/IP stacks. The presence of spam has given me reason to learn the internals and configuration of sendmail to do my own filtering and forge my own emails to get around idiotic spam filters like Mindspring's (so I can send mail from *me* without having to use Netscape's broken editor to relay off an SMTP server). So this influx has helped me more than it has hurt me.

    However, I completely concur with your point about Linux being an elitist system. If someone doesn't want to learn how to run the system, screw 'em.

    Regardless, there will always be a distro out there made by hackers for hackers (and I don't mean crackers) -- if that means I have to put it together myself.

  • Do you whink that we can beowolf this mother? Wouldn't that just be awsum!
  • Is it really "linux as a windows app"??

    I thought it was a linux-on-umsdos thing, with a windoze installer & starter. Big difference.

    We abandoned umsdos installations (with slackware) some years ago, let's keep it that way, OK? :)

  • Image is everything (Why WinLinux will win) (Score:3)

    by teraflop user ( 58792 ) on Friday October 01, 1999 @03:23AM (#1646930)
    There are three mainstream 'Linux for Windows' products in the news at the moment: Armed, Phat, and WinLinux2000. And several other distros that contain the same technology: Mandrake 6.1, Slackware, muLinux, and so on. And DemoLinux.

    Technologically, Phat seem to be most mature and advanced, featuring the option of installing to a loopback file as well as UMSDOS, giving potentially better performance. I can't compare the hardware detection in the various products. I presume Armed doesn't do loopback, but their web server won't serve me any pages today, so I can't tell.

    But technology will not determine success. My take on the ones which will succeed are as follows:

    1. WinLinux2000 will win. It has the most accessible and descriptive name. It will appeal to Windows users. PhatLinux is an obscure hackerish joke on the name of the file system. Armed Linux sounds like a secure distro, not a newbie intro.
    2. Mandrake 6.1 may grab the market if they chose to push this feature, on the basis of their reputation as a conventional distribution. Corel could do even better if they wanted to do UMS or loopback installs, because they have the Windows brand-name recognition.
    3. DemoLinux will do well, and probably make lots of magazine coverdisks. Again, most importantly, the name says what it is.
    Armed are going to take stick for their choice of web hosts, and the fact that their pages are unavailable whenever their product is in the news. Which seems perfectly fair to me.

    As a community out technical efforts are occasionally sabotaged by lack of attention when it comes to image.

  • what appears to be the worst for me is that it is a linux distribution that you cannot (easily) use without windows...
  • From the installation page:

    "It is always recommended to make a new user account rather than being logged in as root all the time. Do this by typing 'useradd [name]', where is the name of the user you want to add. Once added You will need to make a password for that user. To do this, type 'passwd [name]'', again where [name] is the name of the user to modify."

    Why nobody think about a script to run the first time you login to do this stuff?
  • Yes... sooo pathetic. I don't care.. they will fail.

  • Use of IIS/NT explanation (Score:3)

    by Neph ( 5010 ) on Thursday September 30, 1999 @01:52PM (#1646938) Homepage
    Under "strategic partnerships", one of the names listed is "HalfPrice Hosting" [halfpricehosting.com]. So:

    glait:/opt/nephtes/src\>host www.armed.net
    www.armed.net has address 208.141.56.223
    glait:/opt/nephtes/src\>host www.halfpricehosting.com
    www.halfpricehosting.com has address 208.141.56.249

    Same subnet.

    So the reason the server is IIS is because that's what their hosting service uses. Now, you could argue that they ought to be pickier about who hosts their site, but at least they didn't actually decide to set up an NT web server to sell Linux! (No personal interest, incidentally, just thought I'd shed some light.)

    Steve 'Nephtes' Freeland | Okay, so maybe I'm a tiny itty

  • Good (Score:1)

    by Gregg M ( 2076 )
    Now if they can only get rid of those annoying logins and those permission things they would be doing good. :)

  • Linux runs quicker and more stable than Windows 98 on my computer, so how is Linux expected to retain its stability and speed if its running on Windows 98?
  • your conclusions are wrong. just because there are some distros that make linux easier to use, etc, shouldn't mean anything to someone who doesnt want to use that distro. they are not putting this stuff in the linux kernel you know. there will always be slackware (or something like it) for those who really want to or have the time to get into linux (read geeks). for the rest, why not let them get a glimpse of linux?

    you never know, maybe some little kid is gonna look at his dads computer running cnets linux, and wonder about it and learn more about linux in general, and even someday end up writing code thats useful for you (or at least me anyway) if it hadnt been for that maybe the kid would have ended up writing really bad code for m$.

    if everyone in the world used linux, there would still be a core of geeks who had a less user friendly version or whatever. this wouldnt be splintering or fragmenting or whatever. there would still be one kernel.

    i personally am pretty geeky, and wish i had time
    to learn enough about linux to write my own software. but i dont, so i installed redhat and
    gnome. but who knows, maybe someday ill have a
    chance to write some cool open source software, ill be glad that redhat was around when i got started
  • Ya know... I was _about_ to defend this guy until I re-read his post. Now I agree with the others. I use a hacked/muddled/etc version of Slackware 2.x because I like it. I think its a good distro and I promote and defend it. If you don't like it... fine. Use RedHat, of Debian, or Storm (when it comes out) or hell.... create your own. Distro wars are getting old and boring. Its the same thing... "blah is better!", "you use blah?! Get a real distro."

    I use what I like and am most comfortable with. I have 3 version of Slackware installed on 3 different machines. Not because I think it is the "3l33t" distro, but because I have been using it for so long I know it better than RedHat.


    Just use what you like.

  • Actually, according to NetCraft, Microsoft uses Solaris for download.microsoft.com, please see the NetCraft survey at http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=download.micro soft.com
  • Linux on windows. Wont that blow up our computer or something?
  • I have done this several times with no problem. I just used some Partition Magic to resize the partition and left the freespace at the end of the disk. Then when I installed Red Hat, I used disk druid to install the swap and natives in that free space. Works like a charm :)
  • ArmedLinux states very clearly that they are aiming this distro to the first time user.

    Our Design Statement:
    To develop a version of Linux for the first
    time user; to be a guilt free, easily reversed, non-destructive distribution that co-exists with existing Microsoft operating systems.

    I personally don't see anything wrong with this.
    I'm for one would not use it but hey if it brings people to linux and away from M$ ..... why not..
  • Debian prompts you to create a regular user account when you install.
  • Not that I'm going to get into a Windowmanager ware here BUT....the only reason people would find kde or gnome environments wasier to use is because that's all they have ever used. Just because it's easy to them doesnt mean it's intuitive. I remember seeing a page somewhere once that had a list of UI flaws and basic design incompatibilities that windows had. I personally dont think having the close and maximize buttons that close together is a bright idea. I think the nextstep type UI's are MUCH more easy to use.

    Course I'm biased cause I've been running windowmaker since it started and afterstep before that ;)

  • New kind of FUD............... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    1. Build a shitty Dist that claims to be the easiest. 2. Put it on a site full of M$ users. 3. Then when they download it and try it, it turns out to be really hard. 4. then the lamers who couldn't figure it out claim they tried Linux and it's really hard, and is no where as good as winblows. 5. M$ uses this as "proof" that the Winblows OS is the only real choice.
  • great more point-and-click linux... i still disagree with it!

    That is your right, and a fine thing to do. Nobody is going to force you or anybody else to use "point-and-click" Linux.

    Linux is about choice. Some people want just a console. Others want a Windows95 look-alike. Others want Enlightenment with transparent terminal windows and motion video as a desktop background. One of the great things about Linux is that any or all of this is possible, at your choice.

    I don't think we have to worry about crap programmers on Linux. Sure, crap programs can appear. They already do. But again, it is your choice to use them or not. Unlike certain other software monopolies I can think of, nobody is going to force you to use crap software.
  • I tried Armed a few months ago... twice in fact. Neither the first or second beta worked. They'd unzip (no nice install, just unzip) and then they'd crash when I tried to loadlin the system. Same system, WinLinux 2000 worked almost perfect on the first time. Not impressed with Armed, but I'd recommend WinLinux 2000 to newbies looking to stick toes in the water... Seth
  • If they want to be considered credible, I'd think they'd want to at least have a footnote somewhere indicating where someone that is interested in it might find additional technical information such as:
    • Just who their developers are
    • What the general software base is

      ( e.g. - "Based on Red Hat Linux, with our additional tools," "Based on Debian, Plus Our Stuff," ...)

    • What kernel they're running

    And whatever other information would be important to allow other people to know how to expect to support it.

    It may not matter to the Naive New User That Is Trying It Out, but it sure would be useful for me to know such details if that Naive New User happens to come to me for help.

    This may not be in their interests if they planned to provide paid support contracts, but that's not consistent with the ``Best Effort Support'' that the site indicates that they intend to offer...

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close