hey it's up to you. i'd be fairly sure that the money you pay is only going back into a mini microsoft... not gonna help linux as a whole.

ACID_KEWPIE I dont know how many times I am going to have to state the fact that I am not here to promote linux, microsoft, or anyone else. I am here to get a usable distro. As far as helping Linux as a whole, perhaps I should purchase every single distro they have out. Or, by purchasing one of the ones YOU approve of would that be helping LINUX as a whole?
You are absolutely right about one thing
ITS UP TO ME!!!

sorry i didn't mean to sound like that, i do mean it, it's your choice. i just really don't like orgs like redmond and lindows that only seem to see linux as a way to make money. i don't wanna come across bigoted and all that. sorry if i did.

Well Lycoris isn't very usable IMO. It lacks simple editors and other basic things. Why you give a damn about this? well lets say you got a system crash or something it will be hard to recover...

No problem Chris...... Perhaps I am on here for a different reason than most. I am not totally against the windows OS, particularily windows xp, it has served me well.. Never crashed yet in 4 months and except for swithing from OS to OS, my computer is on 24/7. The reason, and the only reason, I want to boycott microsoft is because of their sleezy business practices. So to me, it matters little if Lycoris LOOKS like windows, as long as it does what I want. I dont have a clue as yet, if it will or not, but time will tell. I am using mandrake 8.1 now and will probably upgrade to 8.2 in the not too distant future. I dont have too much trouble with mandrake, but there is a lot I dont like about it. No linux product to date has ever been known for its "user friendlyness" and for everyday use, for one who is not a computer hobbyist, that is very necessary.
Im probably one of the few on here that considers a computer something like a car, fridge, tv or any other applience. Its a tool to play with, or to get work done with. I obviously enjoy playing on the computer, but my life doesnt rotate around it. An old saying my poor old granny used to use "to each thier own"

Tried Redmond/Lycoris, the only distro that I liked less was Corel.
It was clunky and slow.........................................felt like Win95 on 32 megs of ram.
I was running 256M at the time. If you don't like Mandrake....................you will probably be either 1) nauseated by Redmond
2) your nipples will get hard about it

Bottom line....................................get it try it. If you like it, keep it.

But don't get your feelings hurt by the gurus when you ask their opinions.

Apparently Thymox, acid-kewpie and trickykid have forgotten why Microsoft holds 90%+ of the desktop market share and Linux is left with a piddly little 2%.
No, I know full well why MS holds the majority - because companies that make hardware refuse to support any other OS which breeds ignorance in the general public. A recent example: I was trying to get my PCI-ATA100 card sorted (it crashes each and everytime I umount the ZIP drive) and my brother - someone who is supposedly experienced in computers, he did do a BSc in CompSci, afterall - suggested that I should ditch Linux and just settle for Windows because "it'll work properly straight away - you won't need to fiddle'. No, I wouldn't need to fiddle if the manufaturer of the card supported anything other than Windows and Windows-only.

Why would you be so critical of another Linux distro? Development of Linux is forked with over 100+ distributions. Are you going to complain about everyone of them? Those distros meet the specific needs of certain people, just as Red Hat, SuSE and Mandrake do.
I'm not gonna complain about all the others, but I do think that Lycoris is a waste considering the maturity and ease of use associated with Mandy. I've said it about Lindows and I'll say it about Lycoris - if these people can make a distro so damned good, why don't they put their efforts into something that is already around, rather than trying to re-invent the wheel.

With regard to Lindows: I think if the authors/programmers/hackers (delete as appropriate) can get their version of Wine to run virtually every Windows programme around, why not put their efforts directly into the Wine project?

With regard to Lycoris: If they can make a distro that is such a piece of piss to install and run that you'd think you were running the Linux equivalent of Windows, why not put their efforts into bettering a distro that is almost there anyway?

The answer to both: MONEY.

I dont think that the majority of people are really interested in mastering the most complicated concepts in linux.
No-one was suggesting that the majority of people should master the inner-most complexities of Linux before being able to use it. If that was the case, I would be banginging on about Slackware - or better still, why not let everyone make their own LFS? No-one at all was even insinuating that you should become a guru to run it! I (for one) was saying that Lycoris doesn't have to tools available to fix problems that might arise. These problems are more likely to arise in Linux because of lack of hardware-manufacturer's support.

So what if it looks like windows for linux?
Your point? I think that KDE is more than acceptable for most people. My personal preference is to run a very minimalist desktop - but that's just they way I like it. I haven't, and I haven't heard of anyone else stating that "Thou shalt no use KDE/Gnome" - I may bang on about SawFish, Acid_Kewps may bang on about BlackBox. Does this mean that you should not be happy with KDE? These are our preferences. These are out opinions.

Linux is more than an OS its about society and all that stuff?
Im sorry but I dont worship at the alter of linux, or windows for that matter.
Was he suggesting that you should? I, for one, am a good example of the Linux-culture. When I first started using it (about 18m/2y ago) I wasn't really into the 'culture' or anything. I asked a question (or two) here about how to get a particular sound-card to work. Whilst I waited for a reply, I had a poke around and discovered some thing of my own. I read some questions here and thought 'Ah, I can answer these'. So I did. And so it goes on. I still ask questions, and I still answer them. There is no reason to believe that one should worship the OS, but Human nature is to share, and in general to help each other. Linux matches this nicely, and so the Linux-culture works well.

I am not here to promote linux, micro$oft, or anyone else. I am here to get a usable distro.
Well, there are plenty to choose from. Lycoris is but one. Should you go with Lycoris and find that it is the bee's knees, then good for you. I hope, for your sake, that you don't run into problems with it.

But don't get your feelings hurt by the gurus (or us plain ol' non-guru users) when you ask their opinions.
That is just it: they are opinions. Nothing more. Linux is all about choice, and to remove that would be heresy.


Sorry about the length of this post. I had to play 'catchup' - hadn't checked my email for a while.

I just would like to state my point of view here... I have Red Hat 7.2 installed with KDE as my window manager, honestly this is as close as you can get to windows without running windows. Any Linux distro where you run KDE or Gnome is going to be a basic Windows clone while you're in X, and it's as plain and simple as that. Now as far as the underlying services that are available to the user, that's another story. If you want to compile programs, configure the kernel, write scripts, run network administration tasks, ftp, etc... then something like lycoris isn't for you. You need something more advanced like Red Hat or Slack. There are people out there that just use their computers for reading email, word processing, web surfing and games. They don't need 2 gigs of compilers, debuggers and source code. All they simply need is a basic, stable, and secure OS, like Linux. A full Windows install may take up, say 1gb (I'm not sure because I've never done a full install) but if you were to do a full install of Red Hat or Mandrake it would easily take up 3 gigs. I understand the ire of you more advanced linux users that need that kind of power that a more advanced distro offers, but for the casual or even middle of the road windows converts don't want or need that kind of power.

***********************************************************************
***********************************************************************
*Oh, I just would like to make one, smart comment though: *
*If lycoris is the linux equiv. of windows, does it have to be * *rebooted every 2 hours, does it get blue screens, and does it* *crash unexpectedly for no reason what so ever?? Just * *wondering... *
***********************************************************************
***********************************************************************

Please make sure you describe your comment more clearly, you make it sound as if ALL windows versions are terrible and im not defending M$ or anything but win2k and xp are very nice and can run for days on end.

About your question or comment, No its still LINUX, but its been so disguised as windows xp its terrible.

erm... it's a joke...

justiceisblind: i recommend you put big flashy lights around any such comments in future. some people don't process it correctly by default. something to do with their .config i think

Yes, its still bad but the way he described it makes it seem like a plague or something. Windows 2k/XP is almost as stable as linux, and has worldwide acceptance too.

haha.. now that is funny. tell that to my win2k box.. he would be jealous.

***RANT****

Um, all the Windows OS's I've ran have been nice to look at and easy to do things, but for whatever reason they find really good times to crash and burn. I had a physics paper due in 3 days and Win 98 crashed and burned, effectively destroying over half of my term paper. (now I know the importance of a good backup) The only thing I was left with was the first five pages and my VERY rough draft that I had stored on the school's network, which I had no access to until the day the paper was due. (crashed Fri morning, paper due monday afternoon). After getting the hard drive wiped by the recovery disc and getting Office 2000 up and running again I had two days to type up about ten pages of nonsense about nuclear weapons. After saving to disc every five mins or so my sister downloaded some virus from MSN Messenger, therefore frying Windows again. This is Saturday night, while I'm at work, and I'm very pissed and fusturated at this point... so I go to a friends house and finish up what I have to type, print the damn thing up and turn that bad boy in... For all my effort I only get an A. No A+... UGH!! That was the best damn paper I have ever written! And Windows 2k? Crap, what about Code Red... Real secure. But then agian that wasn't really the OS it was that IIS thingie... I haven't seen XP in person, but honestly I would rather run a superior product that I can purchase for half the price or download for FREE and get a ton of software that is equal to many expensive MS windows titles.

I really wonder why a lot of ex_windows users want a linux distro that works as windows. guys get a break it's linux.. designed to be a server OS. For Example: X is more then a GUI its a server.. like most of the components has network accessability.
maybe linux has a chance to gain share on the desktop. but that is not the most important thing about *nux.
I hear windows users talking about how stable their XP is. it didnt crash for me in the last blabla.. well there is a difference in two things in stability.
A: working with win2k or XP every day , putting cpu on.. work for 8 hours and then shut if off.. or maybe leave it on for the night..
B: getting a box running as server with 500+ users on it that runs for like 365 days stable.
at home I run linux both as desktop and server. while I am the server working I see friends logging in with SSh. compiling things and even working with a remote X using cygwin @ home on there win machine. While I am on Enlightenment or blackbox they are on KDE for example. I only notice that when I look in the process list. for the rest..hmmm maybe the bandwidth. are those features possible, the things we all want?

those two things are totally different from eachother.
also the reason why I don't like disto's like Lycoris, is that if something happens where is your power to restore it? believe me if some component is messing up. I want to fix it without doing a rm -rf * .
that is a big difference that u will see in distro's like slack, debian, redhat etc. but not in lycoris or in lindows, both give me money quick OS's that rather steal things and give it another name. although gpl allows this I call this sneaky business. they wont get my support

if u want a linux OS for stability. plz don't go with distro's like lycoris or lindows, but come with the facts: stability and user friendlyness are two thigs that can't be merged into an OS that quickly.

about the statement that linux is more then an OS, I disagree. Linux has features that all OSs should have. I don't consider linux as more then an OS, but I ask myself the question: is for example windows a (good) OS? because I miss strong features in most windows OS's like multi-user things, and the integration with the user's brain and the technique.