What do you think of Xandros?

[Slapdash]

What do you guys think of Xandros?
I dont like that they make it look like MS Win. but there are other things that I think I would like to see maybe be in the next Ubuntu, Breezy

[ming0]

I was interested in trying it at some point, but I think they wanted to charge me for it, so I stuck with Slack.

[Slapdash]

Yeah they have different versions. A Downloadable one and then 3 others.
THey ship it with Crossover Office.

[defkewl]

What do you guys think of Xandros?
I dont like that they make it look like MS Win. but there are other things that I think I would like to see maybe be in the next Ubuntu, Breezy
What's wrong with making it look like M$ Win?

[KiwiNZ]

I have tried several Xandros versions. It is a very polished distro. And is especially good for Windows escapees.
But for me it was just a little too Windows-esque for my liking.

I have installed it on a few friends PC's though and have had no complaints.

[im_ka]

it's okay, but not really free (beer, speech)
here's my review:
http://linuxtimes.net/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=852&mode=&order=0&thold=0

[ctt1wbw]

If you want something that looks like Windows, just stick with Windows. Easy as pie, right?

[Slapdash]

What's wrong with making it look like M$ Win?

I really love the Gnome look & feel.
Way of doing things etc.

[defkewl]

If you want something that looks like Windows, just stick with Windows. Easy as pie, right?
Agree with you. Nice statement.

[TjaBBe]

I just don't manage to bring up much respect to linux products trying to be LIKE Windows. I hated Lindows/LinSpire too and in my view this is just another grab out of the "Lets make a new Windows!!" pot.

So, lets say I hate it (more than Windows if possible) ;).

[defkewl]

it's okay, but not really free (beer, speech)

Making it looks like Windows doesn't has got to do with freedom. What are you trying to state here?

[Brunellus]

Most people are absolutely unwilling to learn anything new--this is why we still have QWERTY keyboards instead of Dvorak. Likewise, most people are going to want a desktop environment similar to the one they've left behind. Why dump on them if they want a Win-lookalike desktop? They'll still get the advantages of the underlying Linux operating system--freedom, stability, etc--and not have to be intimidated.

Seriously, if Linux is going to take over the desktop, a lot of the newbie-hating is going to have to stop. To most users, KDE/Gnome/Xfce/IceWM/Flux/etc/etc/etc arguments are too obscure to matter. All they care about is that they have something that works well enough for them to use it without having to read any manuals.

KDE was nice (haven't used it since 3.2), Gnome was also nice. But hardware limitations (not much RAM) have made me move to Fluxbox, after some study. I still run the gnome volume manager in the background--automounting USB thumb drives & my digicam--but overall I actually prefer this environment for the system that I have. If I were setting something up for my mother, though, I'd probably install Kubuntu on a laptop. KDE is close enough to Windows for her not to be unduly intimidated.

[TjaBBe]

Most people are absolutely unwilling to learn anything new--this is why we still have QWERTY keyboards instead of Dvorak. Likewise, most people are going to want a desktop environment similar to the one they've left behind. Why dump on them if they want a Win-lookalike desktop? They'll still get the advantages of the underlying Linux operating system--freedom, stability, etc--and not have to be intimidated.

Seriously, if Linux is going to take over the desktop, a lot of the newbie-hating is going to have to stop. To most users, KDE/Gnome/Xfce/IceWM/Flux/etc/etc/etc arguments are too obscure to matter. All they care about is that they have something that works well enough for them to use it without having to read any manuals.

KDE was nice (haven't used it since 3.2), Gnome was also nice. But hardware limitations (not much RAM) have made me move to Fluxbox, after some study. I still run the gnome volume manager in the background--automounting USB thumb drives & my digicam--but overall I actually prefer this environment for the system that I have. If I were setting something up for my mother, though, I'd probably install Kubuntu on a laptop. KDE is close enough to Windows for her not to be unduly intimidated.


It's not really like you have to learn anything new. I find gnome very intuitive too, it just takes some getting used to all the locations and stuff. A lot of non-experienced computer users have to search each time they need a program even if they use windows, so what difference does it make if they haven't even "learned" windows?

In fact I think the Catagorised menu of linux desktops is FAR more intuitive to non-experienced computer users, as they often don't know what a specific supplier of their software is (the way Windows menu's are organised).

The ONLY thing we need to get rid of is the guru-image of linux, and there are other ways of promoting this instead of copycatting windows.

[Slapdash]

I dont think anyone here is NOOB-Hating orientating or Dumping on them or Zandros.
I asked what people think of it.
i also dont like the way it LOOKS like Windows. The blue with the same folder icons.
But thats my opinion.
Trying to be windows compatible, to me that's an ok outlook and nich that has to be filled i think. Like you say the more people using Linux instead of Windows the better, doesnt matter what version really.

my intention wasnt to get a flame started at all. just wanted to know from people who actually used it what they think of it.

[Brunellus]

It's not really like you have to learn anything new. I find gnome very intuitive too, it just takes some getting used to all the locations and stuff. A lot of non-experienced computer users have to search each time they need a program even if they use windows, so what difference does it make if they haven't even "learned" windows?

In fact I think the Catogarised menu of linux desktops is FAR more intuitive to non-experienced computer users, as they often don't know what a specific supplier of their software is (the way Windows menu's are organised).

The ONLY thing we need to get rid of is the guru-image of linux, and there are other ways of promoting this instead of copycatting windows.

I still fail to see what's wrong with offering a Win-like interface for those people who might want it. If you want to get rid of the guru-image of Linux, as you say, then what we need to do is lower the barriers to entry, and the desktop is a good place to do this.

Some--maybe most--users will not want to take the time to learn the new locations in a new DE. This is why even a lot of Linux users don't change DEs all that often, and in many cases, don't even bother exploring alternative DEs to the one that came standard with their distribution's installation.

To a totally new user--a computer virgin, so to speak--this might not matter at all. But let's be realistic: the target desktop Linux market is the person presently using Windows on an x86 computer. Even if these people aren't very computer-savvy, they will have certain assumptions of how a computer will feel, based on their earlier experiences. Anything significantly different is likely to turn off lots of switchers, who will run back to the warm, familiar Windows environment they left behind at the first minor wrinkle.

I don't like M$ any more than some people in here, but if we're going to be about humanity to others, I would think that humanity also includes not automatically dumping on people who want to stay with a familiar environment while enjoying the benefits of a free OS.

[paretooptimum]

I tried a few older versions of Xandros over the years. Coming from a number of years on windows (and before that a number of years on apple), it was comfortable for a switcher, but it didn't work for me after the comfort wore off.

The best way I can explain it is by comparing it to a white suburban kid dressing up like a homeboy - if that's not who you are you eventually have to go back to being yourself and stop trying to fool people.

Ubuntu using Gnome is itself, not anyone else. This is good, but takes some getting used to - as does the switch between any operating systems (eg apple to windows)

[Brunellus]

I tried a few older versions of Xandros over the years. Coming from a number of years on windows (and before that a number of years on apple), it was comfortable for a switcher, but it didn't work for me after the comfort wore off.

Curiously, what was the issue that made it stop working for you? Was it something in the DE, or something else?


The best way I can explain it is by comparing it to a white suburban kid dressing up like a homeboy - if that's not who you are you eventually have to go back to being yourself and stop trying to fool people.

Some of those guys never do. Trust me.



Ubuntu using Gnome is itself, not anyone else. This is good, but takes some getting used to - as does the switch between any operating systems (eg apple to windows)

Is Ubuntu still itself when it's Kubuntu? Or running Xfce, or IceWM?

[TjaBBe]

Is Ubuntu still itself when it's Kubuntu? Or running Xfce, or IceWM?

Ofcourse it is, because freedom of choice is exactly what GNU/Linux us about. Ubuntu only gives you a default setup with the gnome desktop, but you ware free to uninstall gnome and instal KDE, or uninstall no X interface at all and use it as a server or download a modified version which delivers you another desktop.

It doesn't change the fact you started out with Ubuntu, you have then just modified it to your needs.

[defkewl]

Argh. Do we have to download via bittorrent? It would be slow so I'll try to download it some other time. Is the free edition stable yet? What is not included in the free edition?

[Slapdash]

Yeah it is stable as far as i can tell. Free has a 30 day trail of Crossover office. the others have more packages and full versions of Crossover.

The business Edition costs $89. not too bad if you consider that Crossover on its own is $69 if i'm not mistaken.

[dcraven]

Although admittedly they do have their place I suppose, I'm not a big fan of any of the non-Free (note the upper case F) distrobutions. I have heard both good and bad things about it though, mostly good IIRC.

Cheers,
~djc

[jdodson]

Although admittedly they do have their place I suppose, I'm not a big fan of any of the non-Free (note the upper case F) distrobutions. I have heard both good and bad things about it though, mostly good IIRC.

Cheers,
~djc

i agree. xandros is taking free software and propreterizing it. that is lame. kinda hypocritical to create a distro of software you did not write that is free, add a few programs you did write and lock them down with a propretary license(i though suse sucked for this too, they have since changed it, ximian as well.). they, like linspire are attempting to clone windows. and the fact is we already have a windows. if you want something that looks like windows and quacks like windows, FOR THE LOVE OF <insert deity here>, use windows. if you are gonna pay for an OS, then up the extra $40 and get windows. then you dont need all the compatability crap that goes with it(xandros, linspire). however, if you value freedom, then stay far away from xandros or linspire.

[im_ka]

Making it looks like Windows doesn't has got to do with freedom. What are you trying to state here?

it's all in my review.

you can always change the look btw. the problem with xandros is that they have created a tool called xandros file manager which is _not_ open source, and somewhat crippled using the open circulation edition

[totalshredder]

My Off Topic Subject


The best way I can explain it is by comparing it to a white suburban kid dressing up like a homeboy - if that's not who you are you eventually have to go back to being yourself and stop trying to fool people.
That made my day right there. I know so many people like that. Then they decide to walk into real philidelphia(where I live) and they get a nice lesson on why they aren't quite ghetto yet. (all white boys go through their 'wanna be a gangster' stage. It's really sad.)
I'm sorry, if I seem stereotypical, but that's life, and it's true.

Luke

My On Topic Subject

I'm sorry, but when you're paying 100 for a linux distro; you're getting ripped off. Expecially if it's any type of distro that:
1. Is more constrictive than windows
2. Is downright not as good as windows
I'm really just going to flat out say this; Windows is a far better desktop operating system than Linux. Linux is awesome because it's free and it's open source, but to me; I couldn't really care much less to be able to modify my source code. Windows goes far farther than my knowledge... Why would I want something more complicated for a desktop system?

I do use linux though; because I don't use linux as only a desktop system. But if I did, it would still be my system of choice. Windows is still better for the desktop though. It's just true.

Luke


(it's just my opinions guys; don't go be hero man and try to tell me I'm 'wrong' it's my opinion.)

EDIT: I would however like to hear your opinions if you think I'm wrong :)

[dcraven]

I'm really just going to flat out say this; Windows is a far better desktop operating system than Linux.
Careful with that. You may want to qualify that with a "for me.". In my opinion, with my computing habits (programmer, tinkerer, lover of source code/freedom), Linux is a far better desktop operating system than Windows. To me, the old saying that
"A computer with a Microsoft operating system installed is like a dog with bricks tied to its head" is quite true.

Linux is not the answer for everyone, true, but be cautious when declaring negativity about it in the presence of those that it fits very well. We may just get belligerent [-X :razz: .

Cheers,
~djc

EDIT: It turns out that you did qualify that with a "that's just my opinion". So I'll let it slide this time :).

[jdodson]

Windows is still better for the desktop though. It's just true.

Luke


(it's just my opinions guys; don't go be hero man and try to tell me I'm 'wrong' it's my opinion.)

EDIT: I would however like to hear your opinions if you think I'm wrong :)

good thing, cause i do have an opinion about you comments :mrgreen:

ok first off when you consider what makes windows "better" do you imply it is 100% better in all respects all the time in every case? because if that is what you are saying you are ignoring reality. realistically no OS beats another OS feature for feature when you compare MacOS, GNU/Linux and Windows(i will ignore other for sake of time).

usability: if you are comparing usability then honestly it seems MacOS owns Windows and Gnome owns Windows(depending on who you talk to). honestly I believe Gnome is a better desktop in terms of usability. my wife plugged in her USB drive(in ubuntu) and with no help from me found out how to get files off it, and save files to it in openoffice and firefox(webpages). that is astronmical. i had to show my wife what "my computer" was and what it meant and what "my documents" was. in ubuntu she just got it. personally the way gnome adds the icon for the usb drive to the desktop is way better than adding it to my computer like in xp. MacOS does that too actually(adds icons to the desktop). i think the desktop icon is a more intuative design. i imagine it longhorn will implement it that way, however as xp stands that is one thing it does not do better. also the start bar is far from intuative. gnome breaks up the menus very well. when we upgraded to hoary she picked up on the "places" right away. in xp i had to default back to the "classic" way where we put my computer on the desktop because my wife hated the new way of dumping it all into the start bar(which is a joke to put it all in one place, btw). seperating it into menus is a better solution imo. however, the list goes on about gnome vs. windows vs. macos. suffice it to say for usability i believe it goes as follows macos > gnome > win xp. just cause you have used xp for ages, does not mean xp is indeed more intuative or easier to use. it just means you are used to it. i used windows(basically) my whole life, minus the commodore and dos era and found gnome superior in ease of use.

stability: yeah ok so xp comes out a clear loser here too. macos and gnu/linux own its house. if i have to qualify this it is a sad world. do an internet search for comparisions.

security: yet again gnu/linux and macos own windows on this one. yet again, i really dont think it needs qualifying. do an internet search for comparisons.

commecial program support: no contest, windows owns all operating systems. this is why people think windows is the best, because it has more commecial app support. if you care about software freedom this is a non-issue as most free software can take care of 90% of every users needs. however if you just want your apps to work, windows is your option. because windows owns this market does not mean it is a better os, it means it is the most popular. clearly, there is a difference.

community: yeah ok yet again, windows is the clear loser here. you would think since basically most people use windows it would have a awesome community around it. however, i have never seen any community like the ubuntu community. we only have a fraction of desktop market and there is a more vibrant community than any i have seen in the windows world. cant say much for mac though, they seem to have a decent community, cant say for sure though.

** EDIT ** drivers: windows wins again too if you only consider number of supported drivers in a commercial nature, HOWEVER it is not as simple as that. the linux kernel has TONS of driver support that will always be included in the kernel. windows kernel has binary driver support that will end the second the kernel changes enough. at times this leads to old hardware no longer supported. this is a pain in the ass. i have a old scanner than ONLY works in Win98 cause the vendor will not release the driver for xp or a opensource one for that matter. the remedy from the vendor? buy a new scanner. if the driver were opensource this would not be an issue. purchasing hardware that has free driver support ensures that you can always use it. so in the end personally, i think gnu/linux is a better long term option. a better short term/sighted option is windows or mac because they offer the goods right now. however, how long will that last? depends on the hardware and vendor. opensource drivers are better for all parties.

in the end honestly if you care about freedom in your software, gnu/linux wins. if you want mad program support from commercial vendors, windows is your master. if you want the easiest desktop experience, use macos or gnome. if you want a secure/stable computer use gnu/linux or macos. however, dont say simply "windows is the best os" because when you consider all elements it is simply false.

[totalshredder]

Careful with that. You may want to qualify that with a "for me.". In my opinion, with my computing habits (programmer, tinkerer, lover of source code/freedom), Linux is a far better desktop operating system than Windows. To me, the old saying that is quite true.

Linux is not the answer for everyone, true, but be cautious when declaring negativity about it in the presence of those that it fits very well. We may just get belligerent [-X :razz: .

Cheers,
~djc

EDIT: It turns out that you did qualify that with a "that's just my opinion". So I'll let it slide this time :).

I am but a young padawaan learner. I do admit it is probably better in some ways. but the main reason it can't really pass up microsoft just yet is because of the lack of power software. Sure there are free alternatives (which is the main reason i'm using linux I'm too poor to buy and to... convicted to steal) but the other more powerful projects; are often better.

Luke

Again, just my personal experience; you have probably had different experiences.

[poofyhairguy]

I do use linux though; because I don't use linux as only a desktop system. But if I did, it would still be my system of choice. Windows is still better for the desktop though. It's just true.

Luke

For a nerd, dreamer or tinkerer's desktop? No. But for my mom's, my dad's and other people that couldn't use the Ubuntu Guide to save their soul...well, Windows only wins there if you leave OSX out.

Windows is the best if you think that momentum is the most important quality.

[Leif]

Wow, way to flame ! I'm going to join in with the flaming though, and say this :

I agree that windows, out of the box, and for a general user, as an everyday desktop, is better than linux. Linux is based on unix, which is written by programmers for programmers. Sure, you can string together a beaty of a line of seds and greps and all, but that's not normal desktop use is it ?

I've been using linux full-time for the last couple of months, and it just isn't there for me. Drivers aren't good enough - I know the reason, but that doesn't change the fact. There are small, surprising things that catch you all too often. DMA isn't turned on by default. You need to manually edit xorg.conf until it gets the right frequencies. And so on.

I'm sticking with linux because I am a programmer, so this stuff is just right for me. And I don't mind learning and tinkering. I like the community. I need the stability. Your average desktop, however, does not need to have a 99.99 uptime throughout the year : if used for daily tasks like checking mail and playing a game and so on, it doesn't need that kind of stability. Plus, let's be honest, XP is not 98.

Of course, security is another issue. But keep in mind, most people simply don't care. They don't.

My point is this : it's not right to keep proclaiming linux is ready for the average desktop, because in many cases it isn't. It will be very soon, the bugs are getting fewer by the day. But until then, saying it's ready and getting people to try it will only result in disappointment, and people feeling they've been lied to. Maybe next year :)

[jdodson]

I agree that windows, out of the box, and for a general user, as an everyday desktop, is better than linux.

i still dont agree. if all anyone wants to do is surf the web, write up a few emails and print, play solitare, gnu/linux is fine for that. so for a general user, gnu/linux is fine. now for a gamer or whatever, i dont think it has arrived yet.


Linux is based on unix, which is written by programmers for programmers. Sure, you can string together a beaty of a line of seds and greps and all, but that's not normal desktop use is it ?

i dont think anyone said because gnu/linux is a programmers paradise that it makes it better on the desktop.


I've been using linux full-time for the last couple of months, and it just isn't there for me. Drivers aren't good enough - I know the reason, but that doesn't change the fact. There are small, surprising things that catch you all too often. DMA isn't turned on by default. You need to manually edit xorg.conf until it gets the right frequencies. And so on.

i have had none of the problems you speak of. milage varies depending on hardware. windows is the same. i actually get more hardware plug and play out of the linux kernel(i.e. had to manually install 1 driver). milage varies though.

I
'm sticking with linux because I am a programmer, so this stuff is just right for me. And I don't mind learning and tinkering. I like the community. I need the stability.

i agree.


Your average desktop, however, does not need to have a 99.99 uptime throughout the year : if used for daily tasks like checking mail and playing a game and so on, it doesn't need that kind of stability. Plus, let's be honest, XP is not 98.

users should require stability while they are doing things on thier computer. programs should not crash any given second. i think it is reasonable to require and OS to be 98% stable. i dont think anyone compared the stability of windows 98 to gnu/linux. i compared the stability of xp, perhaps i should have been more descriptive. xp is less stable than ubuntu i have found. when you speak of desktops, perhaps stability for average users is not as important. when we talk servers or buisness desktops......


Of course, security is another issue. But keep in mind, most people simply don't care. They don't.

it does not mean that it is not a failing of windows. if windows is less secure it is still a bad mark for windows. the business sector should care about security. i really think your "most people" comment is flatly incorrect though. have you talked to "most people." if "most people" dont care then why do they get anti-virus, get patches and install firewalls? why does that come default when you buy a dell if no one cares? i think people do care, it seems that people think that getting a virus is a normal activity, when it really should not be.


My point is this : it's not right to keep proclaiming linux is ready for the average desktop, because in many cases it isn't. It will be very soon, the bugs are getting fewer by the day. But until then, saying it's ready and getting people to try it will only result in disappointment, and people feeling they've been lied to. Maybe next year :)

i never said it was ready for every user of every fashion in every way. i said when you look at all things considered it is not as bad as people make it out to be and might be superior in some respects. in my world, it is vastly superior and usable. however to simply say windows is better is to be simply wrong.

[jdodson]

I am but a young padawaan learner. I do admit it is probably better in some ways. but the main reason it can't really pass up microsoft just yet is because of the lack of power software. Sure there are free alternatives (which is the main reason i'm using linux I'm too poor to buy and to... convicted to steal) but the other more powerful projects; are often better.

Luke

Again, just my personal experience; you have probably had different experiences.

i hear ya. eventually the software will come. some stuff i had to just let go of really. i know for some people that is impossible to do. 100% game compatability is something i had to let go of. its not a really bad trade in the end anyway considering most games are a waste of time.

i think for the software that matters most, desktop, browser, office suite, music player, video player, cd burner, chat. free software got your back. :grin:

[kassetra]

Linux is based on unix, which is written by programmers for programmers. Sure, you can string together a beaty of a line of seds and greps and all, but that's not normal desktop use is it ?

I've been using linux full-time for the last couple of months, and it just isn't there for me. Drivers aren't good enough - I know the reason, but that doesn't change the fact. There are small, surprising things that catch you all too often. DMA isn't turned on by default. You need to manually edit xorg.conf until it gets the right frequencies. And so on.

Plus, let's be honest, XP is not 98.


Interesting, if skewed, perception you have there. Let's see if we can't clear up some misinformation:
1. You're right - Linux, the KERNEL, is based on Unix, BUT it was written by programmers for LARGE, INDUSTRIAL, ROCK-SOLID computing - NOT for programmers. And it's not just semantics. The applications and libraries written around the Linux kernel were not written by programmers for programmers.

2. I've used some variation of Gnu/Linux as my desktop since 1997 - and even WAY BACK THEN, I never once strung together a line of seds and greps as a desktop. While I admit that pre-2000 versions of Linux, the OS package, was not without it's problems, I still never once had a command line desktop.

3. Also, please note that it sounds that you're running TEST versions of a Linux OS package - which ALWAYS requires MUCH MORE WORK in order to use it than would a regular "stable" version.

CASE IN POINT - I have an XP pre-release cd. It didn't install the first six times, on the seventh time, it installed only part way before it died and completely corrupted the install. On the eighth run it finally installed, but as it tried to reboot and start up, it gave me a fatal exception which had to be wiped clean and then reinstalled from scratch, again. On the ninth run, it installed without a keyboard. On the tenth run, it installed but could not or would not configure my video card.

Conclusion - a TEST OS Package that has not been released IS NOT A GOOD BASIS for making claims as to it's usability.

In opposition, the released version of both Ubuntu and Windows XP both installed without a hitch. I didn't have to configure any undetected devices for either.

When I installed my bluetooth device however, XP refused to install any driver, so after I plugged in the cd and installed the driver, XP froze.

If you hadn't said XORG, I would have figured you were trying to run Debian Hammy or some such older distribution because of the problems you seem to have with drivers and configuration. Granted, installing the nVidia proprietary drivers are not the easiest thing to do in Linux - but neither is trying for days to figure out why XP has two nic cards showing in the devices but neither of them work, and when you remove one, it tries to also remove the printer; and there is nothing you can do to fix it, other than not use a nic card or reinstall the OS.

4. To be honest, the only thing that stops most people from simply switching to Linux is the fact that the "knowledge" they've built up of "how to do things" in Windows is not exactly transferable to Linux - it's not that Linux is harder any more by any stretch of the imagination; it's simply hard to relearn ways of doing things. When Longhorn comes out, if it is very different from XP and people have to "relearn how to use it" ... many more people will give a second look at Linux - especially when they have to install it fresh and then try and find all their favorite applications and programs that they're used to using for the new OS version.

If you want to post your opinions on the matter, that is fine, but stating misinformation as fact does little for the community other than inflame emotions and create ill will. Get your facts right before you post something of this nature.

[Leif]

i still dont agree. if all anyone wants to do is surf the web, write up a few emails and print, play solitare, gnu/linux is fine for that. so for a general user, gnu/linux is fine. now for a gamer or whatever, i dont think it has arrived yet.

I can't agree with you fully there. Maybe I'm going on about this too much, but I know a number of other people who've had the same thing : burning CDs, by default, is painfully slow because DMA is turned off. This is a small thing, but it is one example of a problem for a general user.


i have had none of the problems you speak of. milage varies depending on hardware. windows is the same. i actually get more hardware plug and play out of the linux kernel(i.e. had to manually install 1 driver). milage varies though.

I guess mileage does vary. I will say this though : if the average user bought themselves a pre-configured PC, then this becomes a non-issue. Linux pre-loaded PCs can't be that far off, so any hardware problems are bound to disappear as linux gains acceptance.



users should require stability while they are doing things on thier computer. programs should not crash any given second. i think it is reasonable to require and OS to be 98% stable. i dont think anyone compared the stability of windows 98 to gnu/linux. i compared the stability of xp, perhaps i should have been more descriptive. xp is less stable than ubuntu i have found. when you speak of desktops, perhaps stability for average users is not as important. when we talk servers or buisness desktops......

This again is somewhere where our mileage varies. I used XP from when it came out till recently, and it hardly ever crashed on me, despite a punishing number of programs running at any given time. And certainly not ever when I just had email/browser/messenger running. And if you are the kind of home user who reboots every day, voila, instant 99.99% no-crashes.


it does not mean that it is not a failing of windows. if windows is less secure it is still a bad mark for windows. the business sector should care about security. i really think your "most people" comment is flatly incorrect though. have you talked to "most people." if "most people" dont care then why do they get anti-virus, get patches and install firewalls? why does that come default when you buy a dell if no one cares? i think people do care, it seems that people think that getting a virus is a normal activity, when it really should not be.

Hmmm, you're right, maybe they do care. Good point. OK, how about we say software availability and security balance eachother out for the average user ?


i never said it was ready for every user of every fashion in every way. i said when you look at all things considered it is not as bad as people make it out to be and might be superior in some respects. in my world, it is vastly superior and usable. however to simply say windows is better is to be simply wrong.

Maybe the things that windows does better is what bugs me. Linux is great on many fronts, and things improve at a dizzying speed, but there are still quite a few things better in the windows world, and I just want the day to come when linux is better at every single thing !

[totalshredder]

I agree that windows, out of the box, and for a general user, as an everyday desktop, is better than linux.

My good friend, think about what you are saying here. Out of the box better than linux? I just installed windows 2000 today, and this is what I booted up to:

Outlook Express
Internet Explorer
Word Pad ... wow... I can open rtfs... wow...
Paint!
MSN Messenger...
:roll:

Seriously, I also installed hoary two days ago; here's what I booted up to

Firefox
Evolution
Open Office (I can do word, excell, powerpoint and open any file inbetween)
The GIMP
GAIM

I'd rather be with linux. Trust me; you're wrong on that part.


Interesting, if skewed, perception you have there. Let's see if we can't clear up some misinformation:
1. You're right - Linux, the KERNEL, is based on Unix, BUT it was written by programmers for LARGE, INDUSTRIAL, ROCK-SOLID computing - NOT for programmers. And it's not just semantics. The applications and libraries written around the Linux kernel were not written by programmers for programmers.

2. I've used some variation of Gnu/Linux as my desktop since 1997 - and even WAY BACK THEN, I never once strung together a line of seds and greps as a desktop. While I admit that pre-2000 versions of Linux, the OS package, was not without it's problems, I still never once had a command line desktop.

3. Also, please note that it sounds that you're running TEST versions of a Linux OS package - which ALWAYS requires MUCH MORE WORK in order to use it than would a regular "stable" version.

CASE IN POINT - I have an XP pre-release cd. It didn't install the first six times, on the seventh time, it installed only part way before it died and completely corrupted the install. On the eighth run it finally installed, but as it tried to reboot and start up, it gave me a fatal exception which had to be wiped clean and then reinstalled from scratch, again. On the ninth run, it installed without a keyboard. On the tenth run, it installed but could not or would not configure my video card.

Conclusion - a TEST OS Package that has not been released IS NOT A GOOD BASIS for making claims as to it's usability.

In opposition, the released version of both Ubuntu and Windows XP both installed without a hitch. I didn't have to configure any undetected devices for either.

When I installed my bluetooth device however, XP refused to install any driver, so after I plugged in the cd and installed the driver, XP froze.

If you hadn't said XORG, I would have figured you were trying to run Debian Hammy or some such older distribution because of the problems you seem to have with drivers and configuration. Granted, installing the nVidia proprietary drivers are not the easiest thing to do in Linux - but neither is trying for days to figure out why XP has two nic cards showing in the devices but neither of them work, and when you remove one, it tries to also remove the printer; and there is nothing you can do to fix it, other than not use a nic card or reinstall the OS.

4. To be honest, the only thing that stops most people from simply switching to Linux is the fact that the "knowledge" they've built up of "how to do things" in Windows is not exactly transferable to Linux - it's not that Linux is harder any more by any stretch of the imagination; it's simply hard to relearn ways of doing things. When Longhorn comes out, if it is very different from XP and people have to "relearn how to use it" ... many more people will give a second look at Linux - especially when they have to install it fresh and then try and find all their favorite applications and programs that they're used to using for the new OS version.

If you want to post your opinions on the matter, that is fine, but stating misinformation as fact does little for the community other than inflame emotions and create ill will. Get your facts right before you post something of this nature.

Seriously, the guy wasn't screwing facts; he was talking from personal experience. You really can't tell somebody their personal experiance is 'wrong'. X.ORG has given me more problems than even this guy had, whenever I needed help on it; there was just some random guy saying "add your resolution to xorg.conf". I was like "say what?!". It's a lot different for people who aren't used to linux, and it totally depends on the hardware! I've been able to install linux on computers that windows couldn't install on; and windows on ones that linux wouldn't work on. Ubuntu isn't the workstation star of the sky where 'everything always works'. Granted it often works, but why do we have a help forum that gets the same questions asked every day? In a world where linux is really complete is a world where we don't always have to say "make sure you search first". We should never have to do that! No error(s) should happen that often, when somebody posts a question it shouldn't just be "oh darn, another one of those".

Linux is awesome, but windows still has a lot on it.

Luke

(remember! personal opinion!!)

[jdodson]

Seriously, the guy wasn't screwing facts; he was talking from personal experience. You really can't tell somebody their personal experiance is 'wrong'. X.ORG has given me more problems than even this guy had, whenever I needed help on it; there was just some random guy saying "add your resolution to xorg.conf". I was like "say what?!". It's a lot different for people who aren't used to linux, and it totally depends on the hardware! I've been able to install linux on computers that windows couldn't install on; and windows on ones that linux wouldn't work on. Ubuntu isn't the workstation star of the sky where 'everything always works'. Granted it often works, but why do we have a help forum that gets the same questions asked every day? In a world where linux is really complete is a world where we don't always have to say "make sure you search first". We should never have to do that! No error(s) should happen that often, when somebody posts a question it shouldn't just be "oh darn, another one of those".

Linux is awesome, but windows still has a lot on it.

Luke

(remember! personal opinion!!)

kassetra was saying that comparing windows xp to a development version of ubuntu is screwing with facts. and it is. hoary is development, if you have problems with it it is because the devs have always stated that you will have problems with hoary moreso than warty, until hoary is "stable." that has been my expierence as well. it has only been up till recently that my hoary box has worked as well as warty(video driver problems, cedega issues). it is still not fully stablized yet anyway as they are awaiting gnome 2.10.1 patches still.

[kassetra]

Seriously, the guy wasn't screwing facts; he was talking from personal experience. You really can't tell somebody their personal experiance is 'wrong'. X.ORG has given me more problems than even this guy had, whenever I needed help on it; there was just some random guy saying "add your resolution to xorg.conf". I was like "say what?!". It's a lot different for people who aren't used to linux, and it totally depends on the hardware! I've been able to install linux on computers that windows couldn't install on; and windows on ones that linux wouldn't work on. Ubuntu isn't the workstation star of the sky where 'everything always works'. Granted it often works, but why do we have a help forum that gets the same questions asked every day? In a world where linux is really complete is a world where we don't always have to say "make sure you search first". We should never have to do that! No error(s) should happen that often, when somebody posts a question it shouldn't just be "oh darn, another one of those".


1. Yes he was, which is why I corrected his "facts" ...
2. I did not correct his "opinion" about anything, but I did remind him that all is not rosy in Windows land either.
3. http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=24142

As for "errors that happen that often..." ... what happens in Windows is that people "bend" themselves around the OS in order to make it work and not crash because 1. They learn that if you try and start up X before Y finishes down in the task bar it will crash, so I won't do that anymore and they do not ask "how to fix it", and 2. They have no appreciation for the fact that it's not "just them" that has that problem.

[totalshredder]

1. Yes he was, which is why I corrected his "facts" ...
2. I did not correct his "opinion" about anything, but I did remind him that all is not rosy in Windows land either.
3. http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=24142

As for "errors that happen that often..." ... what happens in Windows is that people "bend" themselves around the OS in order to make it work and not crash because 1. They learn that if you try and start up X before Y finishes down in the task bar it will crash, so I won't do that anymore and they do not ask "how to fix it", and 2. They have no appreciation for the fact that it's not "just them" that has that problem.

I'm trying to say he didn't do it on purpose, it's just what he saw when he used it. The reason that windows and ubuntu's "errors that happen often" are different is because the errors in windows are really simple and easy to figure out, just simple things. In ubuntu; they're show stopping. Never in my life have i had to use the win2000 or winXP command prompt to get it to work after an install.

I understand windows isn't all rosy and perfect; but I only had to go on forums to solve my problems twice. With linux I must have done it 50 times. Windows is NOT better; it just has more ironed out. When as many people use windows as they do; microsoft gets a good idea of the show stopping bugs; and fixes them. Also, microsoft does a lot more testing than the average linux distro.

Your illustration was a good one; but I have noticed barely any changes (besides the overall look of things) since I switched to hoary (at least a month ago). Hoary is really stable, but the things he struggled with are in the current hoary version.

Luke

(dang I get so opinonated, but excuse me once again, they are all (hopefully) personal comments :) )

edit: haha, I'm arguing with two moderators. :-P

[primeirocrime]

well I don't like Xandros screenshots, that is why I never bothered to try in the first place, but I do think there is spot for everyone in the party.

As for the everlasting tired beaten to a pulp discussion with microsoft and any product they make, it is quite simple for me, although looooooooong.

Most places don't offer the alternative in the first place. Buy a desktop or a laptop and in most places it comes pre-installed with windows.

Most people aren't even aware of the alternative of FOSS OSs... it's either with Windows or it's an Apple mac. ...they don't just make software, they make sure you'll have to use it, that is their game.

I'm not saying XP or even 98 and 95 weren't good [ethically of course not, but one could really print a text and play a game of sweeping mines and virus] it's not it, this goes further than monopoly juggernauts trying to shape the world by their view. No. This was possible because of the state of things in our society. Education, culture and information are something necessary for the growth of a society, and if this is blackened and considered superficial by the State [who enforces Law who writes up the Law and is slave to those who can simply buy it and sell it]
this is why microsoft can dance this two-step downtempo tune like releasing an OS that makes the computer look slugish, forcing people to buy faster and faster and newer and newer and newer and more and more..

May look out of topic, but it isn't. Why do we use Ubuntu anyway? Why should someone be forced to buy a 600$ office suite when not even a mechanical typewriter costs that much [not talking vintage here...]? Just because everyone uses it? Just because everyone doesn't know any better?

Let's take for example Firefox and Mozilla.org it worked the way it did not only because of the excellence of the product but because this was the first time in the history of computers that the Users were in fact pleased by this product, not just the eager technofanatics like myself. And so the word and/or the software were shared. I did that. For the first time in my life I did that, I've conviced someone to use a software that I personally endorsed. With pleasure. And now Ubuntu. My 4th or 5th distro. This one I'll share, just because i find it good and ethically correct, and with a sense of community. I even go to the planet ubuntu to read what those guys write although most of the time I don't understand a word of what they are talking about in the wikis, but I'm grateful for their work. Very grateful. Here I feel there are Human beings there, behind the number crunching thingy, and in MS, I just see a logo and some very hyper active CEO jumping arround excited by is own disproportionate passion, by is own self.

I am a supporter of FOSS and I think it is one of the keys to establish equality and to evolve our society, and I also think it will promote development and economical growth, because you see monolitical giants are slow, and this one in particular is just a parasite, a disproportionate blood sucker parasite. Sure they have campaings to sell some pcs with a crippled windows version to africa, that is just a drop and a drop of the opiate, the same one they have been dripping slowly on us, forcing us to suck the needle.

There is poverty in the world and unfair trade and people are suffering and although mr. Gates is of a filantropical breed with his foundations and massive repository of the worlds images [and what a charming gatekeeper] he is also a very rich man. One of richest, if not the most. And if there is lacking of water in one underwater river is becasue the rain, the same rain that falls from up there is beeing damed, contained. This is simply a matter of equilibrium and also a bit of my biased opinions, sure. But the truth is, there are people in the world living below my cats provision of food, and I'm just a XXI century guy with some records on my shelf.
For every thing we have, for every thing we take there is soemthing lacking elsewhere.

And I still think they could be better, we all could.


Ubuntu for the people.

[Leif]

Sorry for not replying to your post before jdodson's, it's because I clicked on last post on the forum, and only saw his !


Interesting, if skewed, perception you have there. Let's see if we can't clear up some misinformation:
1. You're right - Linux, the KERNEL, is based on Unix, BUT it was written by programmers for LARGE, INDUSTRIAL, ROCK-SOLID computing - NOT for programmers. And it's not just semantics. The applications and libraries written around the Linux kernel were not written by programmers for programmers.

I stand by what I wrote - Unix was written for programmers by programmers - I quote verbatim. At least that's what any computer science book I've read has told me on Unix. It was an academic project that got out of the lab. I never said anything about the applications, or what it has become. Even still, maybe just because it is what I do, but I still feel that the biggest strength of linux is in programming and development. Your opinion may differ.


2. I've used some variation of Gnu/Linux as my desktop since 1997 - and even WAY BACK THEN, I never once strung together a line of seds and greps as a desktop. While I admit that pre-2000 versions of Linux, the OS package, was not without it's problems, I still never once had a command line desktop.

Again, it was the programmer talking. I was just trying to illustrate a strength of linux.


3. Also, please note that it sounds that you're running TEST versions of a Linux OS package - which ALWAYS requires MUCH MORE WORK in order to use it than would a regular "stable" version. ...

None of the examples I gave were due to hoary being in testing. Are you telling me that xorg is going to start working for me in 2 days ? DMA will be turned on by default ? If so, fantastic ! But I never added complaints about running a test system. I am well aware of what it entails.


4. To be honest, the only thing that stops most people from simply switching to Linux is the fact that the "knowledge" they've built up of "how to do things" in Windows is not exactly transferable to Linux - it's not that Linux is harder any more by any stretch of the imagination; it's simply hard to relearn ways of doing things. When Longhorn comes out, if it is very different from XP and people have to "relearn how to use it" ... many more people will give a second look at Linux - especially when they have to install it fresh and then try and find all their favorite applications and programs that they're used to using for the new OS version.

I agree that being used to windows slows things, but you really don't hear people complain about switching to OSX from windows as they do about switching to linux. I agree that linux is just a different batch of problems, I just think some of them are more difficult than their windows counterparts. Please note that I am not saying all.



If you want to post your opinions on the matter, that is fine, but stating misinformation as fact does little for the community other than inflame emotions and create ill will. Get your facts right before you post something of this nature.

Why is it that any comment that suggests there may be things done better elsewhere than linux gets labelled misinformation and inflammatory ? Why are you upset ? Why would you bear ill will towards me ? The things I am pointing out are small things that can get fixed, and that is why they should be discussed. I am not criticizing YOU.

[BWF89]

Xandros uses a proprietary file manager so I wouldn't be able to use it when I switch to Linux. Ubuntu all the way baby!

[bored2k]

Xandros uses a proprietary file manager so I wouldn't be able to use it when I switch to Linux. Ubuntu all the way baby!
I have used every Xandros version available [except for the sucky free ones], and that XFM is the heart and soul of Xandros. Without it, Xandros is just Win98 with a remixed GUI.

[Gary Powers]

I've used it on my laptop for about four months and it is good .... albeit the slowest Linux I have experienced. However, it handled my wireless perfectly and that was what I was looking for!

Gary

[bored2k]

I have xandros discs [v1,2,2.5buzzinazz,3d-lux] here ... I wonder what would happen if I copy xandros file manager's deb and try them here :roll: ..

[Brunellus]

I am but a young padawaan learner. I do admit it is probably better in some ways. but the main reason it can't really pass up microsoft just yet is because of the lack of power software. Sure there are free alternatives (which is the main reason i'm using linux I'm too poor to buy and to... convicted to steal) but the other more powerful projects; are often better.

Luke

Again, just my personal experience; you have probably had different experiences.

Power software, eh?

Gimp isn't quite photoshop (*sigh* wish I had .raw file support for my Pentax *istDS!). that's my main complaint.

What amazes me is that, while there's a lot of (apparently OK) mathematical, astronomical, and bioinformatic software out there, there hasn't been a big push to get f/oss to the social sciences. I'm actually quite surprised that nobody has attempted or called for a Free Software equivalent of, say SPSS.

Free Software might *really* get off the ground if they made a lot of economics students use it ! :wink:

[kassetra]

I stand by what I wrote - Unix was written for programmers by programmers - I quote verbatim.
History Lesson 1: http://www.bell-labs.com/history/unix/acronyms.html


None of the examples I gave were due to hoary being in testing. Are you telling me that xorg is going to start working for me in 2 days ? DMA will be turned on by default ? If so, fantastic ! But I never added complaints about running a test system. I am well aware of what it entails.
No, what I'm saying is that yes many of the issues you're having is because Hoary is in testing. Period. It's in *testing*! They're not done tweaking it. That's what they do in the final days before release, clean it up, tweak it etc. Now, it may not do everything *YOU* want it to do when it's released, but they're not finished yet. Giving constructive criticism to the developers better serves your purpose than to complain about what they should be doing here.



I agree that being used to windows slows things, but you really don't hear people complain about switching to OSX from windows as they do about switching to linux. I agree that linux is just a different batch of problems, I just think some of them are more difficult than their windows counterparts. Please note that I am not saying all.
1. You don't hear about complaints switching to OSX because that wouldn't help the marketing team now would it?
2. The people that do complain end up going back to windows and that's that.
I know both of those things from first hand experience doing Mac tech support.
Also, it's not that Linux problems are harder anymore - it's that Linux allows you to get to the "meat" to fix the problem that makes it seem harder. Most of the people I dealt with in Customer Service as a Level 3 tech could not fix their Windows boxes, nor could they even figure out what was wrong. Their solution was to reinstall the entire thing, and most of the time, that did not fix the problem.



Why is it that any comment that suggests there may be things done better elsewhere than linux gets labelled misinformation and inflammatory ? Why are you upset ? Why would you bear ill will towards me ? The things I am pointing out are small things that can get fixed, and that is why they should be discussed. I am not criticizing YOU.
1. Comments that suggest things are done better elsewhere that are based on fact are accepted as such, but your statements about Unix were completely incorrect. See History Lesson 1.
2. It's inflammatory because you have misstated the facts and at the same time used those misstatements to "point out" why another system is better - that is a straw man argument and it doesn't fly.
3. It's not ME that bears ill will; nor am I upset. I am stating that your straw man arguments and your misinformation causes ill will.

[jeffjj]

Can't believe I am going to engage in this thread but heres my two cents...

My complaint about using Windows at work is that I do not have one single piece of software that I need Windows for...not one! So why do I use Windows...because I have no choice. Thank goodness we have old billy boy taking away my freedom of choice :(. I build web applications too so its not like I do not power use my tools.

However at work we now have a rouge Ubuntu server that we use as our build box. It was sweet too because Ubuntu found its domain name automatically, and then also mounted itsself on the Windows network automatically.

One thing I will say about making the switch, and I bet others are like this too...I really didn't notice how bad Windows was until I got off of it completely. For the last few years I have run Linux at home (my Wife has a Mac) and it just keeps getting better all the time. My Windows computer at work feels pretty pathetic now.

[Slapdash]

Man, how these things snowball ;)

[Leif]

History Lesson 1: http://www.bell-labs.com/history/unix/acronyms.html

I am not trying to be obtuse, but can you please tell me exactly where the counterargument there is ? It says it was an operating system built for researchers. Operating Systems researchers. There's nothing about a desktop in there. If you want to throw urls around, here are some others. Unfortunately I don't have the first with me to copy the text :

http://he-cda.wiley.com/WileyCDA/HigherEdTitle/productCd-0471694665.html

http://www.iu.hio.no/~mark/lectures/encyclo.html

scroll down to evaluation.

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/runux3/chapter/appb.html

this last one is about gnome specifically. You may notice Miguel de Icaza is one of the authors, and he has put his name to this view.


No, what I'm saying is that yes many of the issues you're having is because Hoary is in testing. Period. It's in *testing*! They're not done tweaking it. That's what they do in the final days before release, clean it up, tweak it etc. Now, it may not do everything *YOU* want it to do when it's released, but they're not finished yet. Giving constructive criticism to the developers better serves your purpose than to complain about what they should be doing here.

As I said before, if the issues with xorg get cleaned tomorrow, I will be happy to congratulate those involved. But the DMA stuff is exactly the same in warty. I know other people running warty who have this exact same problem, and if they had been casual desktop users I don't think they would have been impressed that they can't burn CDs properly.


1. You don't hear about complaints switching to OSX because that wouldn't help the marketing team now would it?
2. The people that do complain end up going back to windows and that's that.
I know both of those things from first hand experience doing Mac tech support.
Also, it's not that Linux problems are harder anymore - it's that Linux allows you to get to the "meat" to fix the problem that makes it seem harder. Most of the people I dealt with in Customer Service as a Level 3 tech could not fix their Windows boxes, nor could they even figure out what was wrong. Their solution was to reinstall the entire thing, and most of the time, that did not fix the problem.

I wasn't talking about marketing, but about people I know doing the switch. Clearly you have more experience on this than me, so I'll accept what you're saying. Your second argument goes for any OS though, we don't get to hear about people who tried ubuntu and went away either.


1. Comments that suggest things are done better elsewhere that are based on fact are accepted as such, but your statements about Unix were completely incorrect. See History Lesson 1.
2. It's inflammatory because you have misstated the facts and at the same time used those misstatements to "point out" why another system is better - that is a straw man argument and it doesn't fly.
3. It's not ME that bears ill will; nor am I upset. I am stating that your straw man arguments and your misinformation causes ill will.

1. This is clearly something we can debate, but I did not pull my view of Unix history out of the thin air. It is the generally accepted view of Unix in computer science circles, I've heard it repeated by many of my professors, and it is in the textbooks.
2. I never said windows is better, I said it's better for the average desktop user. This is my "opinion", and it is not based on FUD. Again, why is this inflammatory ?
3. I'm glad you are not upset, because I did not mean to upset anyone. I have not used straw man arguments, however, and I am not spreading misinformation.

[arctic]

What do you think of Xandros?
just another linux-distro. :D

[Leif]

Sorry for what turned into a threadjack, so I'll post on topic for once : I know 2 people who use Xandros and they're very very happy with it. It's good for them because they want to stick to the kind of environment they know, and they need xover office. Unless you need a xover supported distro, I don't think it has anything over Ubuntu, and I think that Ubuntu is the better choice because it is maturing very quickly, has a huge momentum going and has a lot of good ideas.

[Slapdash]

just another linux-distro. :D

Bwhahahaaha :grin:

[TjaBBe]

I wasn't talking about marketing, but about people I know doing the switch. Clearly you have more experience on this than me, so I'll accept what you're saying. Your second argument goes for any OS though, we don't get to hear about people who tried ubuntu and went away either.


That we do, people who are disapointed in Linux right after installing, sadly, tend to throw a (mostly their first ever on these forums) post over here about how much they hate Ubuntu, and how much he regards us as a bunch of geeks.

About OSX, I think people do a lot more research before they step to OSX as oposed to the research they do before they start with Linux. This is because OSX is a system wich they have to pay (quite a lot) for. And they have to buy a mac with it, instead of the pc they allready had. This way people who start using macs have a lot more knowlege of the system beforehand instead of people who in one day decide to throw everything away and run linux because it's supposed to be "cool" and "free".

And when a small thing doesn't work right after they installed it, instead of fixing it they get disappointed, and start whining about their beloved windows.

I believe this is the main reason for people getting more often disapointed in Linux then in mac.

[Leif]

That we do, people who are disapointed in Linux right after installing, sadly, tend to throw a (mostly their first ever on these forums) post over here about how much they hate Ubuntu, and how much he regards us as a bunch of geeks.

That's true, but there are still more who never make it to the forums, or who don't bother posting. If it were just the 50 people who have posted the "Linux sucks you guys are morans" threads who turned away, Ubuntu would have desktop dominance by now :-)


About OSX, I think people do a lot more research before they step to OSX as oposed to the research they do before they start with Linux. This is because OSX is a system wich they have to pay (quite a lot) for. And they have to buy a mac with it, instead of the pc they allready had. This way people who start using macs have a lot more knowlege of the system beforehand instead of people who in one day decide to throw everything away and run linux because it's supposed to be "cool" and "free".

And when a small thing doesn't work right after they installed it, instead of fixing it they get disappointed, and start whining about their beloved windows.

I believe this is the main reason for people getting more often disapointed in Linux then in mac.

You have a good point there. As you said, for many people linux is just something they try out when they're bored, and then get upset with when they have to make an effort. This must even apply to distros like Xandros - if you paid for it, you probably stick with it.

[TjaBBe]

You have a good point there. As you said, for many people linux is just something they try out when they're bored, and then get upset with when they have to make an effort. This must even apply to distros like Xandros - if you paid for it, you probably stick with it.
I don't know about that... As Xandros also comes in a free version, which people will allways take over the paid one (at least we dutch people would do so :)). I'm afraid people will mostly download that version, and then hassled again by the limited support.
When Xandros was full-pay, like LinSpire, I don't think the effect would be very big either, because people will not get a non-free (as in free beer) distro when there are free ones out there.

[Slapdash]

I agree. the point is if they have to pay almost the equivilent for Linux than Windows then they will rather go for Windows.

[Leif]

I agree that the price point ($0) is a major selling point for linux. But surely some people don't mind paying for it ? Suse, mandrake, xandros, etc. all make money from their deluxe versions. In the end I guess it's a good thing that all of these distros exist, it means that whatever you want, you can find it.

For some people something that comes for free is inherently suspect, and a version they paid more for *must* be better. For others, there's the promise of support, although to be honest, with the exception of going to a user's home to fix it, I don't know how much better the help you get can be than that offered in this forum at the moment.

[Brunellus]

I bought SuSE 9.1 (personal) because I didn't have access to a computer with a CD-ROM burner, and I needed something, anything to rescue a hopelessly-messed-up WinME box.

There should be something like the Linux equivalent of Hare Krishnas who hand out free Ubuntu LiveCDs (or Kn/Gnoppix, whatever). That would have helped me out in a jam.

[jdodson]

I bought SuSE 9.1 (personal) because I didn't have access to a computer with a CD-ROM burner, and I needed something, anything to rescue a hopelessly-messed-up WinME box.

There should be something like the Linux equivalent of Hare Krishnas who hand out free Ubuntu LiveCDs (or Kn/Gnoppix, whatever). That would have helped me out in a jam.

http://shipit.ubuntu.com/ - takes awhile to arrive, but its close. :wink:

[CowPie]

What do you guys think of Xandros?
I dont like that they make it look like MS Win. but there are other things that I think I would like to see maybe be in the next Ubuntu, Breezy
It's amazing, and it integrates well with other Windows networks, such as printing. It is much better now with autopackage, since repositories were their weakness.

[Slapdash]

So they ship Autopackage with the new one now?

I think the idea behind Autopackage is a good one but as we have seen ont this forum that opens up a whole new can of worms ;)

[bin]

Going back to the original question :0

Xandros is a very good result of some hard work by some talented people.

I still have Corel Linux on which it was based - and can vouch for the progress. Integration with existing networks was and is very good.

It falls down for many experienced users because it has gone proprietory in its core which heavily limits the K apps that you can add - and because its available repos are sluggish and or out of date. XN is fine if it works but more often than not it doesn't. I'd like to be able to use it - and have tried very hard but it is just so restrictive!!

On the wider issue of Windows - if it floats your candle - use it, if not then don't... life's too short to get het up about such a little thing like that.

in light

bin

[Bob Owen]

I have tried most of the Linux distributions looking for one that provides great functionality and can co-exist on my home Windows network. I thought that I had got close with Warty, but it was not perfect as I was not able to print to a windows network printer. Then I read in Personal Computer World last weekend that they rated Xandros the Editors Choice. I ordered it, installed it on Wednesday and am so pleased with it that I don't plan to try anything else. Not only can I print to a Windows printer on a network, but I can also do a Remote Desktop Connection to my Windows server on the network. It doesn't worry me that it looks a bit like Windows, in fact if Linux is ever to take off in a big way then if it looks and works a bit like Windows it will be easier to get users to migrate to it. So it has been great Ubuntu, but Xandros now rules, OK? (I may just try Kubuntu to make sure I have not missed anything there though.)

[Antman]

First, Xandros 3.0 is a damn good distro when it comes to ease of use and working within a Windows environment (best I’ve seen in that category so far).

My only gripe was that I couldn’t get the video to stabilize when I upgraded to a newer laptop. Other then that, it was VERY easy to use. I love their File Manager, it auto-mounts NTFS partitions and drives flawlessly, USB pens, etc.; it makes Windows users feel at home.

The Xandros Networks service is not the best, but you can't have every thing.

Ant

[Stormy Eyes]

I agree that the price point ($0) is a major selling point for linux. But surely some people don't mind paying for it ? Suse, mandrake, xandros, etc. all make money from their deluxe versions. In the end I guess it's a good thing that all of these distros exist, it means that whatever you want, you can find it.

When I used SuSE, I didn't buy SuSE for the tech support. I bought SuSE because it came on CDs, and it came with a nice thick manual. I'll tell you this: the manual SuSE includes with its Professional packages saved my ass more than once when I was a n00b.

[poofyhairguy]

Doesn't Xandros look just like Windows (or try to at least)? Seems like they have a VERY specific market.

[bored2k]

Doesn't Xandros look just like Windows (or try to at least)? Seems like they have a VERY specific market.
Yes it does, but if you're someone trying Linux for the first time and want a flawless and painful Windows file sharing, you wouldn't mind [regular Xandros user has never even seen Gnome ;)]. On the other hand, XFM is a killer app any linux user would adore [I have used ever Xandros version, ever].

[poofyhairguy]

Yes it does, but if you're someone trying Linux for the first time and want a flawless and painful Windows file sharing, you wouldn't mind [regular Xandros user has never even seen Gnome ;)].

Maybe. I was never looking for a Windows replacement in Linux though. I always wanted something different.



On the other hand, XFM is a killer app any linux user would adore [I have used ever Xandros version, ever].

http://consultingtimes.com/articles/xandros/filemanager/xfm04lg.png

I'll pass....

[bored2k]

Maybe. I was never looking for a Windows replacement in Linux though. I always wanted something different.



http://consultingtimes.com/articles/xandros/filemanager/xfm04lg.png

I'll pass....
I know XFM is not pretty. But it's a marble @ what it does. I never needed any extra apps for dvd burning or whatever. It has great networking integration, and a lot of features. Anyone who seriously used xandros will tell you XFM is the meat of that distro.

Plus, that's a Xandros 1 screenshot I believe. Xandros 3 Delux's XFM is a bit more polished. It doesnt look like a Linux apps, but its useful.

[TravisNewman]

ech-- that's not pretty ;)

Here's a screencap of Xandros 3 with XFM open:
http://www.osnews.com/img/snapshot2.png

still, ech-- I've hated Windows explorer ever since Windows 98, and this looks just like it. Maybe it's the killer app of Xandros, I dunno. But it looks nasty, in my opinion.

[bored2k]

ech-- that's not pretty ;)

Here's a screencap of Xandros 3 with XFM open:
http://www.osnews.com/img/snapshot2.png

still, ech-- I've hated Windows explorer ever since Windows 98, and this looks just like it. Maybe it's the killer app of Xandros, I dunno. But it looks nasty, in my opinion.
The whole distro looks hideous, not even KDE 3.2 saves it [it's like a locked -do not touch- scheme]. I'm with everyone that says that It looks like a piece of an elephant's spare *-cache clean*, but I must admit It was really useful at times, specially with v3 D-Lux VPN-Gui. That wasnt really an XFM feature , but that distro looks like one single ugly app :-P.

[poofyhairguy]

The whole distro looks hideous, not even KDE 3.2 saves it [it's like a locked -do not touch- scheme]. I'm with everyone that says that It looks like a piece of an elephant's spare *-cache clean*, but I must admit It was really useful at times, specially with v3 D-Lux VPN-Gui. That wasnt really an XFM feature , but that distro looks like one single ugly app :-P.

I hate to be shallow when it comes to OSs, but that looks like the uglist distro I've ever seen. I'm sure it works graet at being a window's replacement...but 2K was great for its stability, not its looks...

[TravisNewman]

I don't think it's shallow-- for whatever you do on your computer, you have to look at it. Therefore, you at least want it to be presentable. If I had to look at that to do work, I wouldn't use my computer as much. ;) But I'm sure there are ways to change the look, to at LEAST help it.

[bored2k]

I don't think it's shallow-- for whatever you do on your computer, you have to look at it. Therefore, you at least want it to be presentable. If I had to look at that to do work, I wouldn't use my computer as much. ;) But I'm sure there are ways to change the look, to at LEAST help it.
Trust me, its a PAIN. In xandros 1 it was pure hell. In xandros 2, installing gnome through apt automatically removed xandros-[several]config-files, creating a soon to explode volcano. On v3 D-Luxe, there weren't that many problems, but installing gnome/gdm would still render your X unconscious every once in a while. Themeing KDE ? sure, but it's not as efficient as a normal kde distro [some apps will just stay xandros-like <-- In kcontrol, they manage to hide some Xandros look changing options, you could get it right by upgrading with debian repositories.. creating yet another vulcano]. Oh and by the way, Xandros Networks is so freakin slow ! Ok I'm going against myself I might as well shutup :P.

[TravisNewman]

haha. Nah you aren't going against yourself, you can just see the pros and cons. I'd like to see something as functional as XFM come to other distributions, but one that's more efficient and, as shallow as it may be, that doesn't look just like Windows.

[bored2k]

haha. Nah you aren't going against yourself, you can just see the pros and cons. I'd like to see something as functional as XFM come to other distributions, but one that's more efficient and, as shallow as it may be, that doesn't look just like Windows.
Indeed. I remember most of the time I only had XFM, Konsole and FF [like hell I'm using XFM as a browser..] not *btdownloadcurses* spatial nautilus, k3b. It's still not worth the price tag. When Xandros breaks, there's no cute geeky way around it. A xandros user needs to have the install disc inside the tray at all times. http://distrocenter.linux.com/comments.pl?sid=34239&cid=83519 ;)
http://distrocenter.linux.com/article.pl?sid=04/08/15/0455216&tid=127&tid=23&tid=104&tid=92

[Antman]

Indeed. I remember most of the time I only had XFM, Konsole and FF [like hell I'm using XFM as a browser..] not *btdownloadcurses* spatial nautilus, k3b. It's still not worth the price tag. When Xandros breaks, there's no cute geeky way around it. A xandros user needs to have the install disc inside the tray at all times. http://distrocenter.linux.com/comments.pl?sid=34239&cid=83519 ;)
http://distrocenter.linux.com/article.pl?sid=04/08/15/0455216&tid=127&tid=23&tid=104&tid=92

Ok, to be fair let's look at the "current" version of Xandros, version 3. The core and Xandros Networks is now compatible with with Debian's archive. I have installed K3B and many other apps from Debian's tree with no issues.

Ant :wink:

[bored2k]

Ok, to be fair let's look at the "current" version of Xandros, version 3. The core and Xandros Networks is now compatible with with Debian's archive. I have installed K3B and many other apps from Debian's tree with no issues.

Ant :wink:
You didn't understand. I meant that it's good to have a single XFM, unlike GNOME's multiple windows [nautilus, k3b]. I didn't say Xandros wouldnt support debian's repositories. I know they work, since Xandros v1, the first thing I added was debian unstable to sources.list. I have tweaked Xandros 1,2,2.5 and 3 to boredom, and none of them provide a solid flawless tweak ability like other distros can. Xandros [IMO] is a don't touch distro for people who want the easy way out, even if its a lame shortcut :-P [I just bashed my old /me there].

[rattaro]

I know XFM is not pretty. But it's a marble @ what it does. I never needed any extra apps for dvd burning or whatever. It has great networking integration, and a lot of features. Anyone who seriously used xandros will tell you XFM is the meat of that distro.

Plus, that's a Xandros 1 screenshot I believe. Xandros 3 Delux's XFM is a bit more polished. It doesnt look like a Linux apps, but its useful.

I personally think the XFM WAS ahead of it's time, but Konqueror and Nautilus have caught up already. Yes, XFM can burn DVD's, but we have apps for that. In terms of networking, XFM may have the slight lead for now, but it won't be long before the rest of the world catches up and surpasses them. Keeping things proprietary is often a liability these days, not an advantage.

[weekend warrior]

Not only does Xandros look like winblows, it feels like it, very sloooow for me when I tried the latest OCE. There were lots of lags. I was actually shocked how subpar performance was compared to other distros tested on the same system. Maybe that's part of their plan? imitate the look and feel?

[Slapdash]

Sometimes this is a great pity. Same to me with Suse 9.2 dont know about 9.3
It is REALY an awesome distro. it works and it works beutifully 2 MAJOR concerns for me with it is these:

1. SLoooooowwwww man it creeps. Maybe just on my PC but Ubuntu flies and Fedora is also quick.

2. Yast is one of THE greatest tools BUT, getting other repos. to work PROPERLY is a pain. if they could fix those two major probs it would be awesome.

now i think Xandros might have the same problem.
GREAT functionality but slow speed / way of implementing it lacks.
Why i dont know.

Ubuntu again has the core features perfect, but might lack the lets call it "spit and polish" ;) of the other distro's wich might not neccesarily be a bad thing at all, but we are trying to get the numbers arent we.

I suppose thats whats the really interesting thing about Linux. the choice of what you have or want or even need to put up with. ;)

[andlinux21]

I tried Xandross its a nice distro I recommend it for linux newbies that was before Ubuntu I really like Ubuntu and started telling my friends to try it \\:D/

[davidgypsy]

Listen guys, it's all about the freedom to have your Linux any way you want!! Stop griping about how this or that distro is some way or the other, just be happy we are not locked into a distro that we can't do much of anything with, let alone download it for free and share it with our friends, over and over and over...

[pdk001]

nowdays M$ is scared of linux & google, M$ is going down slowly even though many people recently use windows OS
i hope linux to dream come true to be mainly OS in our machines, it will be

[bored2k]

This discussion has stopped being productive so it's going to get locked right about...