LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions
User Name
Password
Linux - Distributions This forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on... Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 07-02-2002, 02:45 PM   #1
HairyCajun
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2002
Posts: 2

Rep: Reputation: 0
lindows from a newbie perspective


I came across this forum looking for information about lindows and read what this linux community had to say about it. I think some of you guys are missing what lindows means-->it may become a viable alternative to windows. Let it be known that I am no stranger to linux. I wish that I had the time to devote to overcoming the steep learning curve of linux...but I don't. I'm a medical student and a father and the last thing I have time for is scouring over html pages of how-to and help forums to figure out any particular linux problem. I installed RH linux on my laptop and even got the sound working (finally). I used rpm's for adding software. I later abandoned the OS (sorry fellas) because it was not intuitive enough (ie easier learning curve). I just got tired of having to research almost anything I wanted to do in Linux. People like me probably represent most of the computer users. That is, I use computers because they are a means of getting things done, not a hobby. I also am sick of M$ controlling how I use my computer and their efforts to monopolize the industry. If only there were an alternative to windows with the rock solid reliability of linux and the intuitiveness of windows--enter lindows.

I however share everyone's pessimism about Lindows' chance of success. But I remain hopeful that it will succeed. I know some people in this forum could care less, but think of what would happen. If Lindows did catch on and go big, there would finally be some $$$ backing Linux. And lets face it guys, Linux is about a decade old (i think) and it has only been successful in penetrating the server and enterprise market to any significant degree. I know money is the antithesis of the desktop Linux community, but if that is what it takes to propagate Linux into the lucrative desktop arena, then why not embrace it. I don't think anyone in this forum would object to more software/hardware support (money generated) for linux. In the end, you'll have people like me that pay for an easy-to-learn, windozish, and uncrashable OS (if Lindows gets it right), and people like you who still have an uncrashable and customizable OS but will reep the benefits of the money generated by people like me.

I believe Linux, via Lindows, has the potential to rival M$ and cause the market to make a more functional, less obtrusive, and a less hardware taxing OS that everybody (including the less-than-computer-literate people) can use with relative ease. The Linux community can only gain from Lindows' success.
 
Old 07-02-2002, 03:05 PM   #2
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Rep: Reputation: 199Reputation: 199
You sound like an advertisement for Lindows, do you get a paycheck from them.. no offense, but your story sounds that way.

I like Linux though, it works for me, it truly doesn't matter if it takes over the desktop market or not.
And I truly believe that Lindows is not the answer though from what I have read, word of mouth, and seen so far to take Linux over the desktop market.
Linux wasn't designed to be another pretty box that can run MS Office to me...etc. There are other means in which to have Linux get a stronghold on the desktop market besides making it so it runs MS apps. Just my opinion though.
Lindows to me is defeating the real purpose of Linux and sometimes it does seem they are out to make a quick buck. I mean, com'on, $99 bucks to become an insider to get news and updates, sounds sneaky to me and is clearly a rip off.

Oh well, it doesn't matter to me as I probably won't even waste my time in ever installing it, I have no purpose or reason to.

Last edited by trickykid; 07-02-2002 at 03:09 PM.
 
Old 07-02-2002, 03:14 PM   #3
crashmeister
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541

Rep: Reputation: 47
If you look for $$$ backing Linux buy your favourite distro; don't think lindows is in it to share anything but whatever they get for free with their paying customers.The CEO doesn't exactly have the reputation of a social worker - more like something from the animalarea.
What would be your reason for switching from M$ to anything else when you still rely on a single source afterwards?Plus the way this is starting out it will be even more expensive than M$ 99.- per year; every year.I rather switch back to M$.
 
Old 07-02-2002, 06:23 PM   #4
HairyCajun
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2002
Posts: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Trickykid,
There may be other ways for Linux to get a stronghold of the desktop market, but since MS Office programs are the most commonly used PC programs in the Windows world, wouldn't you think it would be in Lindows' (or any other Linux distro or application that allows use of Windows software's) best interest to support MS Office. This is a moot point, though. Wine and VMware can, to a certain degree, handle running Office...right? (Im a newbie) The real task set before Lindows is ease of use and compatability.
And you may be right about the "quick buck" comment...Maybe it's some bullshit hoax. But maybe not. The $99 fee for a mere glimpse at Lindows is crap, I agree. But this is a budding corporation and it needs money. The fee is probably a desparate attempt to increase capital the business needs to get going--or am I being naive?
BTW, I didn't mean to sound like salesman of Lindows. It just sounds too good, for me at least. Linux reliability without the learning curve.

Crashmeister,
Firstly, I thought it was only a one time fee of $99. If it is a subscription, I agree with you, they can keep that crap.

Secondly, relying on a single source, temporarily, will help Linux grow to the masses. I'm in not implying ONLY one source is good for the long run. As of now, Linux is spread to thin. For example, the average user is used to installing programs by a simple double click on some executable file. For Linux, as you know, configuring and compiling of the source code is necessary. RPM's were a great idea but they don't work some of the time or specific features of the software can be missing. If this method were standardized, a simple double click would be possible in Linux with full compatability and features. I know standardization can limit options for linux distros, but this has to happen for widespread acceptance.

Here is a profound statement to think about guys--> What happens when x86 has outlived its welcome i.e. Itanic. I can already hear you say "but that's for big iron servers" or "it'll be years till that becomes mainsteam." The fact is, it's Intel. They have put millions into that cpu and are not going to simply abandon the project because it tripped out the starting gate. And more importantly, Itanic technology AND its instructions set will trickle down to the desktop arena...sometime. Who is going to rewrite Linux and most of its applications and hardware drivers(because it will take more than a simple recompile)? You would probably say the Linux community in general. And how long would this take? I would say at least 4-5 years but I'll bet longer. That time lag would render Linux totally dependant upon Intel and it's willingness to produce x86 processors. Last time I checked, the Wintel comradary was still going full force. M$ may have quite an influence on Intel's product line.
It would be in Linux's best interest to have some financial backing at this time (ie a standardized widespread desktop OS). Hmmmmmmmmmm.

Or am I thinking to far ahead?
 
Old 07-02-2002, 06:45 PM   #5
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Rep: Reputation: 199Reputation: 199
Quote:
Originally posted by HairyCajun
Trickykid,
There may be other ways for Linux to get a stronghold of the desktop market, but since MS Office programs are the most commonly used PC programs in the Windows world, wouldn't you think it would be in Lindows' (or any other Linux distro or application that allows use of Windows software's) best interest to support MS Office. This is a moot point, though. Wine and VMware can, to a certain degree, handle running Office...right? (Im a newbie) The real task set before Lindows is ease of use and compatability.
And you may be right about the "quick buck" comment...Maybe it's some bullshit hoax. But maybe not. The $99 fee for a mere glimpse at Lindows is crap, I agree. But this is a budding corporation and it needs money. The fee is probably a desparate attempt to increase capital the business needs to get going--or am I being naive?
BTW, I didn't mean to sound like salesman of Lindows. It just sounds too good, for me at least. Linux reliability without the learning curve.
As I agree that MS Office is very popular and is used by nearly every Windows user, corporate and home users, I think in this case that some poeple should be made aware that there are alternatives. I hate MS Office to tell you the truth, I would rather read in plain ASCII text than using a .doc file, just because I don't like using MS Office or even installing it.
In fact usually anyone that sends me a .doc file, I'll usually reply asking them to either send in plain text or send the attachment in another format like rtf.. etc.
In other words, I could have sworn that Lindows did make a statement that not all MS applications or even Windows designed apps will work in Lindows, taking back their claim. Read that here: http://newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=...=thread&tid=23

So to me, Lindows is just another Lycoris trying to make it very easy to install for Windows users making the switch to Linux, which in my book is no different from any other Distro except the possiblity its gonna be bloatware and filled with a bunch of unnessary software. Again, my opinion mostly.
 
Old 07-02-2002, 07:15 PM   #6
crashmeister
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541

Rep: Reputation: 47
I don't really bother too much about chips and stuff - if they don't work with unix intel doesn't have a market except desktop and that isn't exactly where the big bucks are.I don't know much about M$ office either - last time i checked wine opened everything from office and so did OpenOffice. But I don't really work with those apps so there sure are bugs somewhere.The problem is not the apps or how 'complicated' linux is.The problem is that people tend to stick with what they know and that there is a deep distrust towards things that are free or at least don't cost an arm and a leg.I played around with a plotter for fun (and a friend).With M$ he can't get the output to the correct size and invested so far about 5000.- in software and services.
With my box I can get it right for about 5.- bucks (cost of bootcd).
But thats Linux; technical and dangerous - so he sticks to M$ and throws some more money that way.

Last edited by crashmeister; 07-02-2002 at 07:18 PM.
 
Old 07-03-2002, 09:52 AM   #7
RedHatMN
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2001
Distribution: RedHat 9
Posts: 110

Rep: Reputation: 15
Lindows Blows, Check out Lycoris...
 
Old 07-03-2002, 10:52 AM   #8
c0rk3y
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2002
Location: NY USA
Distribution: Gentoo1.4/ FreeBSD4.x
Posts: 78

Rep: Reputation: 15
Back to the point fellows

I totally understand where HairyCajun is coming from. In the schools or facilities they show all new comers a PC running some form of windoze. This is all any one knows and thinks exist. So we as people form habits and tend to stick with them. But as for all of us in this forum realize the alternatives, we decided to break free from what was told "this is how it is and reboot". But in order for any user or power user to explorer their options a whole new learning curve must be facilitated in the developing end. Me personally, have finally got past the "ok i installed it, now what?" phase and now im working on perfecting the implementation of software needed to get my regular daily tasks accomplished. Keep in mind, this took some valuable free time away. I think the biggest help was installing as many flavors of Linux i could get a hand on. Im glad that parts over. But for now, the biggest obstacle was finding how and where to get the apps needed and making sure it was the correct one needed. Phase 2 is where i think the Linux community losses a bunch of highly potential users. After the onslaught of phase 1 i think the users are so frustrated because they feel it should be perfect sailing from that point on. What brought this part out is I have convinced several people to try some form of Linux and see if it works for them. Two out of three still keep it on their system but there usage has stopped. They dual boot and windoze is still default. They are still accustomed to installation and the wide variety of apps to install (most illegal copies). But i must add, the recent releases of say RH, Mandy, Suse have pissed me off because they made install a breeze for the most part but doesn't hold the promise that it usta have in the earlier releases. Id like to tell end users to go for something more solid but I don't think they would understand the deep technical install process without seeing or experimenting with a binary distro first. Humm i can rant for awhile here but i think the point is made......
 
Old 07-03-2002, 11:02 AM   #9
Big Al
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2002
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 143

Rep: Reputation: 15
I think Linux SHOULD have a newbie-friendly distro to attract windows users who maybe have neither the time nor the desire to become experts. I've never tried either Lindows or Lycoris, but I've heard that they're easier than Mandrake. I've also heard that Lycoris is much LESS bloated than Mandrake, though also less flexible and you have to pay extra for development tools. Consider this: if your online bank switches to IE-only it would sure help if there were a LOT of Linux desktop users raising a stink about it. And it wouldn't matter if they were using Lycoris/Lindows. Those of of using Slackware/Debian/Gentoo would still reap the benefits of a larger market share.
 
Old 10-07-2002, 12:01 PM   #10
NIKKIE
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2002
Location: florida
Distribution: windows,mandrake
Posts: 7

Rep: Reputation: 0
lycoris doesnt support anything , pretty but who cares if u cant connect to yur dsl .. blah ,,, get a mac or redhat ,, screw these underworked os's
 
Old 10-07-2002, 12:34 PM   #11
NIKKIE
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2002
Location: florida
Distribution: windows,mandrake
Posts: 7

Rep: Reputation: 0
i agree with the author of this post ,,, does sound a lil like an advertisement but still i agree , i want something to work and be stable , windows doesnt cut it , and mac doesnt have my fav winmx and winamp , so here lindows , works with windows stuff but it works and is stable , i hope this gets updated and gets a lil cheaper .... otherwise i just switch to a mac and get an emualtor for my winmx and winamp ....lycoris blows!! ... i asked some questions in the chat and it doesnt support my dsl , no aol , its just another linux distro that looks pretty , if yur into linux stick with red hat or for the newbie mandrake ....
 
Old 10-07-2002, 12:35 PM   #12
NIKKIE
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2002
Location: florida
Distribution: windows,mandrake
Posts: 7

Rep: Reputation: 0
god my dislexic spelling suffers!!! ;p
 
Old 10-08-2002, 08:30 AM   #13
KayJay
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2002
Location: dev/null
Distribution: redhat, mandrake
Posts: 218

Rep: Reputation: 30
kinda funny that people actually think lindows is an entirely new OS's or new disigned.. well I got news for them..
lindows is based on xandros linux also known as Corel nowadays..
ya.funny.

also.. they are very good in stealing things from kde and giving it a different name.. although GPL allows it (unfortunately) it's a shame for the linux industry...


also realize that everything lindows can do, linux can do too, maybe more, because of the flexibility u have in e.g. redhat, slack, debian and other native linix distro's ...

thinks like lycoris, lindows and other hybrids are serious bloatware trying to make money using the linux bandwaggon..


oh btw.. if u want to run MS office on a linux kernel u can also use Cross Over Office on basically any linux distro..

apps like WinE can run mirc or other programs, and right now it would be possible to run photoshop using this application layer..
so it's all posibile..
 
Old 10-08-2002, 08:55 AM   #14
crashmeister
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541

Rep: Reputation: 47
This all sounds wonderful enough - like having a stable and working environment thats easy to manage.
Problem is: to find out about it you have to cough up 99.- (or 299.-) bucks to start with.
Now remember - this is a beta release.If it doesn't work for you nobody will give you your money back.
There's nothing wrong with paying for a linux distro but the pricing they have seems to be a bit out of line for a newcomer that has to put out a regular release first - especially given their trackrecord of promising everything to everybody and then try to make it work later.
Plus keeping the source closed is a clear violation of the GPL.
Plus all the guys at the other established distros know what they are doing either - after all lindows only took their tools and polished them a bit.
So basically you are paying for software that violates the GPl and is beta from guys you can't trust a word they are saying - I don't think so.
 
Old 10-08-2002, 09:40 AM   #15
KayJay
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2002
Location: dev/null
Distribution: redhat, mandrake
Posts: 218

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by crashmeister

So basically you are paying for software that violates the GPl and is beta from guys you can't trust a word they are saying - I don't think so.
that's the fun part about it, as long as Lindows isnt distributing their OS as GPL (which they probably don't ) they arent violating the GPL licence.
GPL allows this.. for example.. wasnt microsoft using BSD's TCP/IP stack?? and still using it?? that was the BSD licence which is even less flexible then the GPL.
if it would be a violation against the GPL Copyleft it was prohibited and against the law (the law to protect the author aka copyright or left wathever)

Last edited by KayJay; 10-08-2002 at 09:42 AM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Noobs perspective on install aikidoist72 Debian 2 02-04-2005 11:26 PM
Linux from a desktop user's perspective locke86 General 9 05-26-2004 03:21 PM
Lindows laptop Edition or Lindows 4.5? BlackEcho Linspire/Freespire 8 03-06-2004 02:09 PM
Newbie to Linux using Lindows OS trying to install wireless usb nic patejl Linux - Wireless Networking 2 02-29-2004 03:13 AM
frustrated Lindows newbie CountryBoy Linux - Newbie 11 03-01-2003 10:31 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:31 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration