First of all, let's get this out of the way: I often have about 4 or 5 distros on my machine at any one time. I am one of those people that keeps "a few" gigs free to test out new distros and see what developments are being made. I do, however, have one constant. I have one version of Mandrake (currently 9.1) that is kept seperate from all others - that is my "working" OS. The one I do not play around with.

Now that's over, let's get on.

I bought the (UK) Linux User & Developer magazine today - principally because it had LindowsOS 4.5 as a cover mounted CD. I have wanted to try out this for a while but no-one had previously (to my knowledge) had it as a cover disc.

So, I duly popped in the CD, booted from it and got to the installer. It asked which partition I wanted to use (I opted for "advanced" harddisk tools). I told it I wanted to use /dev/hdb2 - which is already formatted as ext3 - as that is the partition I generally use for new distros that aren't going to spend too much time on my drive. It installed without a problem. I was surprised to find that it didn't ask any questions to which I have become used - no language or keyboard settings (even Windows asks for this), nothing about my graphical setup, zip and zilch. Ok, I can cope with that. I rebooted. I found that it had overwritten my MBR with its own bootloader without asking me anything about this. I was not entirely happy, but given the target audience, I can understand it - and it's not a hard thing to sort out anyway. So I continued booting and I had a play around with it. It seems OK, but I didn't really do much with it. I was taken aback a bit that it had a bit of a problem with my standard audio hardware - an SBLive - but that isn't a problem.

OK, playtime over. Let's sort out the bootloader. I boot from my Mandrake install disc and enter rescue mode, I mount the filesystems appropriately, chroot them and re-run /sbin/lilo to re-instate my normal bootloader. I reboot so I can get on with some work under Mandrake. And this is where the problems start.

Mandrake won't boot. It gets so far, and then says that I have some errors on my hda partitions. Why is this, I wonder. It turns out that although I selected hdb2 as my target partition, LindowsOS thought better and so dutifully reformatted my ext3 hda7 partition as reiserfs and completely wipes out any and all data stored on it. This is not helpful considering that partition was used for my Mandrake's /var directory. No wonder Mandy is having problems. Not only is is technically the wrong filesystem, but it also contains nothing that should be there!

How did I fix it? Well, as luck would have it, I have Mandy 9.2 installed also, so I booted from Knoppix, mounted my (newly re-formatted as ext3) hda7 and hdb4 partitions (hdb4 is where Mandy 9.2 lives) and copied over the entire /var directory. Now Mandy 9.1 boots, but I have lost a huge amount of data. You see, I keep all sorts of files in Mandy 9.1's /var directory. The largest set of files that I have lost would be a collection of ISO files for different distros.

OK, now onto the question:

Is it normal practice for LindowsOS's installer to completely disregard the user responses given to questions that could be of vital importance?

Let's play make belive for a moment, shall we? Let's first imagine that I am self employed; that I use my home computer to do my work on, my accounting, etc, etc. Let's just imagine that I actually bought LindowsOS. Let's also imagine that rather than the installer taking out just my /var partition, it took out something a little more important - my /usr partition, or my /home partition. Or, more realistic, it takes out my "D:" where I store all my documents ("C:" is where I store my Windows install and all my programmes). Let's also imagine that as a result I have to take the day off trying to sort out the issue and restore my system, and I therefore fail to make any money on that day. What would LindowsOS/Lindows.com have to say?

Now, I am in no way suggesting that this has happened. In my case, all that has happened is that I have lost ISO files of discs that I have lying around (somewhere) anyway. But I think that LindowsOS/Lindows.com should take on board my comments:

I appreciate your target audience are people that may well wish to make a switch from Microsoft Windows to the Linux platform, but are not sure about the learning curve, and so the installer should not be overly complicated and should do all that it can to discover hardware, and configure settings for the user rather than by the user. This, however, has (in my case) come at a cost - albeit only of time. It could prove expensive for others, though. Look into it.

Lindows was made for cheap pcs with linux installed. It's not worth the trouble of installing, but it wasn't well designed for multiple operating systems but rather stand-alone. Also, too many programs that can be purchased for Lindows can actually be downloaded for free. It's a windows-replacement that is money oriented and definately not the best linux os.

The answer to your main question is -- no.
When LOS is installed to a HD with only one partition it will repartition the HD into 3: a boot, a swap and a data partition, the boot and data being using the reiserfs file format. When the advanced option is used it should only take over the selected partition also reformating with the reiserfs file format.
Of course, with the target audience in mind LOS is usually looking for a fat32 partition. The only thing that I can think of is that the multiple Linux patitions somehow confused the installer. It would be interesting to know if the same thing happens if the patition being installed to was fat32.

Unless your referring to the Click 'N' Run service fee Lindows.com does not charge for any program that is not already a comercial program.

Well it's no RedHat or Susse, but then it really doesn't aim to be, you could use it as a server but then that not what they optimized it for either. Its a desktop with automated install (brain dead install) and I find it to be on par with xandros and lycoris. Some have said that libranet is a bit more flexable/powerful and I suspect that's because it more like traditional linux, but I haven't played with it yet. The phrase "best linux os" is of course quiet subjective. What is best for one person may not be best for another. I have an old P1 computer, the best OS for it in my opinion is muLinux, someone else milage may vary. At present I feel Lindows is the best meets my OS needs but again -- milage may vary.

I simply think that you , using or testing, 4 - 5 OS's, am creating your own problems. LindowsOS is aiming on home-users that at max dual boot with Windows with as main goal to forget Windows all together and happy "Lindowzes" for ever!

This is a wrong way to come to any conclusion about LindowsOS. If you want to review LindowsOS a fair way, you got to play a other tune. A fair review within the goals of the system.

RoofRabbit - You may have noticed that I said I was a "habitual tester", that is to say that I enjoy tinkering with different distros to see what developments are being made, without having the hassle of actually changing my chosen distro several times. I do find it worth the trouble of installing. There has been a lot of 'press' (certainly on the Internet) regarding this distro, and up until now I have not been able to make an informed decision for my self. The "worth" of a distro is a very personal thing. I find it worth-while because I am interested.

T.House - Thanks for the insight into what it should do. I happen to disagree with you on a very minor point. There should be no reason that the distro can get "confused". It is, after all, only a programme. Since it was designed to have user input, it shouldn't be too much to ask that the responses given by the user be the values used throughout the rest of the programme.

Bicol_Willem - I do not think that I have been unfair at all in the way I have chosen to test distros. As I have said above to T.House, when a programme asks for user input, it is not unreasonable to think that the responses given are those that will be used. Since the programmes asked me where I wanted to install LindowsOS, and I responded with "hdb2", there should be no reason what-so-ever that it decides otherwise. I appreciate your comments about reviewing "within the goals of the system". I and believe that one of the goals is to provide a solid, stable, working Linux system. I do not believe that any goal of LindowsOS is to wreak havoc on any existing installation of Linux. Other OSs installed, be they Windows, Linux, BSDs, QNX, BeOS or uncle-Tom-cobbley's OS, should not be a factor in how the (installation) system behaves, and I am appalled at the 'workmanship' of the distro. Quite appart from losing a fair amount of (retrievable) data, I have now come to the realisation that some very useful things, like RPM databases, used to reside in my /var directory, and that if I wanted to sort everything out in one fell swoop, I would have one hell of a lot of work to do. As it happens, I am only going to fix things as and when I find they are broken. Thanks Lindows.

To sum up:
I was actually hoping that I could give Lindows a positive appraisal. I have heard much about how bad it is for trying to take 'free' software away from the people, and I personally believe that to be a little bit of scaremongering. A company getting involved in Linux has (so far) not really had a bad effect on the community. I was hoping that Lindows would be a good way to get people started onto the Debian road (as I understand it, it is not that hard to replace the 'broken' apt-get). I was hoping for a lot of things. And they were not delivered. I do not believe in actively discouraging people from installing any Linux OS, but I can be certain the, as a 'newbie friendly' distro, I am not going to vouch for Lindows.

Part of your conclusion:
Mine:
You was hoping a lot of things but somehow you didn't understand where you dealt with. This LindowsOS is probably the first real "non-traditional" Linux. Debian based but not just an other Debian desktop. Apt-get is replaced by a far superior installer (CNR). Hard to swallow for Debian fans. It IS Linux but it was never designed (is my personal best guess) to run with several other Linux distro's, although it will greet a "other distro" with "Welcome" (/disk/Welcome). Lindows.com tries to reach out with Linux to real newbe's (These people don't run 4 - 5 OS's), to Wind---s users (those might at max run at first dual boot, hence the simple installation options.), in short: The home user. This first line info should not be ignored. Again, to run a fair evaluation of the distro you really need to place it in a environment it can live in. A environment where it was designed for. There it WILL live up to any expectation. Its easy, its as complete (with the help of CNR) as can be and rockstable. Well, the last is my experience, hence LindowsOS became very fast my prefered OS. In your case, you didn't even had the chance to actually work with the OS and that, after all, is the real test. Does it work well, is it stable, is it easy to use/upgrade/manage. You missed all that ONLY because the thing would not set up the way YOU wanted it.
I also like testing other distro's but found a simple installation work around: Removable hdd racks. That way my LOS is always there while having all the fun trying others in my free time. I know it is a nice challence to some to spent hours getting LiLo or GRUB or whatever going with all distro's and other little prob's solved. This is however little "productive" and more a hobby of its own. I find it unfair to judge any distro on the fact that it will not properly work or install next to 3-4 other distro's. That simply isn't the goal of any distro. That others have better work arounds this wish doesn't tell much more then just that. So, I would recommend LindowsOS any time but not to those that will not accept that it is a DIFFERENT Linux with a own target public and to those that can and will not accept that some "traditions" in the Linux community are broken. One sample: The command line. One practically doesn't need it anymore using (and sticking with) LindowsOS. That's a sin in the eyes of Linux guru's! So is running the system as root. However, it all works very fine and ...real easy. Easier then any thing else I found so far. The last is what the masses are after.

Well, a Linux for all, all for Linux! Happy testing.

OK, this is getting old now. I will make my greviences nice and simple for you. I expect any distro, regardless of its target audience, to do as it is told by the user. What is the point in an 'expert' or 'advanced' option if the only question the user is asked there is completely ignored?There are no distros around that expect to be installed along side multiple other operating systems, however, none of them (so far), with the exception of LindowsOS, has decided to install itself onto a different partition when the user has explicitely stated which partition they wanted it to be installed onto.The responses given by the user should be taken as gospel, regardless of whether they make sense to the installer or not. Since LindowsOS' installer allows for only ONE option, and that is onto which partition should LindowsOS be installed, I would expect that this sole response be at the very least respected.Others do not have 'workarounds'. They install where you tell them to install. Simple. No magic, no waving of chickens, just pure and simple programming. A user gives a response, the installer uses that as its input.I am not arguing about the software included with LindowsOS. I have no problems with any Linux vendor writing, using and supporting their own applications. The fact that you have even put this in your argument suggests to me that you do not understand what my problem with LindowsOS is exactly. Having only looked at CNR briefly, I would agree that it is easier to use than apt-get, but I would say that this is not a good basis to call it 'superior'. This is a side argument, however, so from this point on, I shall ignore references to it.Is that too much to ask? I didn't want to fight with my machine, but with thanks to LindowsOS, I now have to. I refuse to believe that with all the different distros out there installing exactly as they should do, ie on the correct partition, that it is an impossibly large task to write the installer to respect the users input.Good for you. Personally, I do not enjoy having to remove the sides of my case just to install and test a new OS. I too have a very reliable (with the exception of LindowsOS) method of installing and testing new OSs. It's called having a seperate harddrive that is only ever used for this purpose. I can cope with an OS trashing any existing bootloader as I am comfortable running maybe 3 commands to get it back to a useable state. And funnily enough, it doesn't take that much effort, certainly not hours, to add a new entry that simply points to another partition.No, what is more productive is when an OS doesn't trash the /var partition of another already-installed OS thereby wreaking havoc on someone's productive environment.All distros have a target audience. My guess is that LindowsOS is targetting some of the same people as others like Mandrake and SuSE. Perhaps even Peanut. I am quite happy with the concept of target audiences.So, if one does not need a command line in LindowsOS, why does LindowsOS ever bother shipping with many still in perfectly good working order. Why not simply remove them? Surely if no-one needs them they are simply taking up space that could so easily be used for 'better' purposes?No, the masses are after an OS that installs without fuss and doesn't disrupt their current working environment. Even bloody Windows will install onto the correct partition when told to do so. Does LindowsOS really want to be seen in the eyes of their potential users as "more trouble than its worth"?

LindowsOS is only at version 4.5 (or at least that is the version I installed from the cover CD of Linux User & Developer Magazine. I sincerely hope that by the next version this has been sorted. I cannot believe that with all the well paid, and non-paid contributors to LindowsOS, an installer that gets the correct partition when specifically selected is that hard to do.

Let's conclude: We disagree. (nothing really wrong with that).

Next.

I agree with you, witeshark, that LindowsOS runs just fine on its own. It is remarkable how some "judge" the system for i.e. being unable to run next to xyz other OS's. That's a wrong criteria imho. Most computers run Windows only so why not a Linux only system? Running LindowsOS next to Windows isn't a problem at all. That should be fair enough, I would think.

I do not agree about the root thing. It makes it EASY to use for all. A big point. Next to that, LindowsOS do has actually options to set up users as many as one want. That means that LindowsOS can be "protected" that way (a reall Linux at work) In fact it added a simple option for those that can not manage the permissions etc. native to the Linux OS. From own experiences I know using root is not leading to any problem so far. LindowsOS is fairly save behind its firewall. This is sure a fact for the ordinairy home user which is, after all, the target market.

I've tried not to post on these threads but I just can't stop myself. Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? 'How dare you judge Lindows just because it trashed your hard drive. We can suck and be as proprietary and non-interoperable as Microsoft. But don't you say Lindows isn't a real Linux, either.'

How about some sympathy for the guy whose drive just got screwed and a protest that that's not *supposed* to happen, instead of declaring that it's okay that it *does* and dismissing the guy's trouble?

Now, I've never installed Lindows and I never will but I'm not saying a word against it - I would hope that it *doesn't* ordinarily screw up like that and that it's a fine distro for people who want it.

But the comments in this thread are unbelievable.

Sorry your drive got screwed, Thymox.

Right on digiot. it is regretable that a fellow Linux user ran in this kind of trouble. I regret that just as much as you, even if I didn't express so. Still, let's be honest. He was trying the OS far beyond its users goal. That simple fact might have caused his trouble and has nothing more to do with the capabilities of the OS, known as LindowsOS. A Linux for all but all needs to realize that there is no such thing as a ABSOLUTE.
Nuf said

Argh, how can you defend broken software? If he clearly told it to install itself to a specific partition, and it didn't, it's broken. It doesn't matter what its goal is, it shouldn't cause data loss like that. I'm not trying to bash Lindows, I've never used it, and I respect its purpose even if it does cost money. But if its software gets out of hand like that, it's a problem. I'd expect something like that coming from Microsoft, but not from a Linux distro. If his description of events is true, face it, the software malfunctioned.

FWIW, I installed LindowsOS 4.5 as my first OS after reformatting, and it ran one program one time, and then that program would crash and nothing would start up until I reboot. I was forced to go straight back into Knoppix to do a hdd install of it so I could download other distros.