PDA

View Full Version : freespire - OSS edition - GONE!



deanlinkous
March 8th, 2007, 02:58 AM
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.distributions.freespire.user/1668



(PS: I'm typing this post from the soon-to-be released Alpha 1 of
Freespire based on Ubuntu. Look for it this week. It's very early,
plenty of bugs to go around, etc., but it's a solid start.)

I think we should drop the Freespire OSS Edition. (This is the Open
Source Software edition of Freespire that contains NO proprietary
software in it at all).

I make this recommendation for three reasons:

1. We've been able to study the download statistics for Freespire 1.0,
and for every person who downloaded the OSS Edition, there were almost
1,000 downloads of the "regular" Freespire version. So, in other words,
not many people really were all that interested in it. By dropping
support for the OSS Edition, /*we can free up valuable engineering
resources*/ to stay on the product the other 999 out of 1,000 user want
and use. Most people are using Freespire for the very fact it DOES come,
right "out of the box," with the support for Java, Flash, MP3, Windows
Media, ATI, nVidia, etc. It only makes sense to direct all our resources
at that.

2. Now that Freespire is being based off of Ubuntu, if someone is that
motivated to run a 100% OSS Linux OS, they have lots of options,
including Ubuntu. Ubuntu users will soon have CNR, so it will be easy to
start with Ubuntu, and use CNR to then supplement that OSS operating
system.

3. Because all of the source code for Freespire is available, someone
who wants to build their own OSS edition, can do so. In fact, I'm sure
those handful of people who were downloading the OSS Edition, are the
same people who probably know how to do just that.

So I'd suggest we toss all our resources at the regular Freespire
version. I'd like to hear other's thoughts on this.

Thanks,

Kevin




Now you see it now you dont....

benuski
March 9th, 2007, 08:21 AM
This is disappointing, but not really too suprising, especially considering that its Freespire. To be honest, I really doubt that anyone who wants to use a true OSS linux distro would think of using Freespire anyways... they'd choose Debian or Fedora or something like that.
I'm a member of the camp that says everything should be OSS first, and then you can have the freedom to download and add whatever you want. Yes, this isn't as convient, but its the best way to minimize the proprietary software you have, cause you`ll only have what you need.

karellen
March 9th, 2007, 08:54 AM
I don't really care, I've never liked freespire/linspire and never used it...so it's not something important for me ;)

darksong
March 18th, 2007, 01:07 AM
Freespire is a great distro - but its flaws start to show when something goes wrong, eg if cnr fails to install a product it will not let you download via apt-get or cnr, it will see a uninstalled product and throw up and unsolvable errror.

It also doens't let the installation of .deb files in the automated way like ubuntu. They should of bolted something onto cnr to allow this.

Freespire would be a perfect linux if they fixed its bugs via updates which are non existant.

igknighted
March 20th, 2007, 02:45 PM
*YAWN*

It's freespire... if you care about FOSS principles that much your aren't using it. The only draw to the distro is the pre configured binary blobs, so without them whats the point?

izanbardprince
March 21st, 2007, 05:21 PM
Well, I myself might switch to Freespire when they release their 2.0 version (based on Ubuntu).

Purists aside, the main reason people don't switch to Linux is because it's such a pain in the butt to get non-free codecs, and hunt down and install video drivers, etc.

If Linux is to be taken seriously, it must offer all of this from the very first time the user boots it up.

I think the goals of Ogg, Open Document, etc. are worthy ones, but Linux distros should at least be able to transition people from the proprietary stuff, to those ends, I'd like to see some transcoding tools that can turn your mp3's into Ogg Vorbis, among other things.

deanlinkous
March 21st, 2007, 05:29 PM
If Linux is to be taken seriously, it must offer all of this from the very first time the user boots it up.


Well, windows offers all that and I still do not take it seriously and people stil leave it for linux so are you sure that is what matters?

izanbardprince
March 21st, 2007, 09:26 PM
Well, windows offers all that and I still do not take it seriously and people stil leave it for linux so are you sure that is what matters?

Well, most people that use a computer really have no idea what they're doing, and thats why most of them are Windows users and thats why so many of them wonder why their computers are kludged up with spyware and viruses.

For 90% of computer users, the only way they MIGHT ever use Linux was if it was either dead simple to install/use or came pre-configured with their computer.

deanlinkous
March 21st, 2007, 11:15 PM
If what I wanted was windows without virii/spyware/adware and so forth I would just learn to avoid that junk - not switch to a different OS with a totally different design philosophy and then argue that it should be more like the OS I left in the first place.

makes no sense to me :)

Eddie Wilson
March 24th, 2007, 03:55 PM
What are people talking about with all the MS Windows crap infecting linux. We are talking about making your computer work. A pure OSS distro is not going to do it. Look around. How many people do you know uses a PURE OSS operating system. Do you? I'm sure you don't unless your stuck in a cave with RMS.
Eddie

deanlinkous
March 24th, 2007, 05:25 PM
If you haven't used a purely OSS system then how do you know it doesn't work? define "work"? What is the point in using linux for a "change" and for the "choice" it provides then letting companies dictate what formats and apps we have to use? Sounds a bit contrary to me.... . ;)

jrusso2
March 24th, 2007, 05:36 PM
For all the purists talk bout open this and open that what it comes down to is people want something that works out of the box and just does what they need to do.

Most people are not interested in some holy moldy war thats been going on since 1983.

People need flash codecs java sound modems video etc to just work.

If you want something truly open use gnusense.

But I don't know a single person who uses it.

Jeanette

Eddie Wilson
March 24th, 2007, 06:12 PM
If you haven't used a purely OSS system then how do you know it doesn't work? define "work"? What is the point in using linux for a "change" and for the "choice" it provides then letting companies dictate what formats and apps we have to use? Sounds a bit contrary to me.... . ;)

What sounds a bit contrary to you. Who is telling YOU what formats and apps to use? I just know for a fact that your system is FULLY OSS. :lolflag:

stokedfish
March 24th, 2007, 06:23 PM
Who cares? Still 530 distributions left...

http://distrowatch.com/

I wouldn't mind another 500ish distros bite the dust! ;)

Eddie Wilson
March 24th, 2007, 06:27 PM
Who cares? Still 530 distributions left...

http://distrowatch.com/

I wouldn't mind another 500ish distros bite the dust! ;)

Amen to that!:)

Lord Illidan
March 24th, 2007, 06:40 PM
If you haven't used a purely OSS system then how do you know it doesn't work? define "work"? What is the point in using linux for a "change" and for the "choice" it provides then letting companies dictate what formats and apps we have to use? Sounds a bit contrary to me.... . ;)

I have used a purely OSS system..and no it doesn't really work for me. Sadly I have to balance propietary with OSS...even if it is a 90% OSS system.

I think people see it as an all or nothing question - either 100% OSS or 100% propietary. I interchange them. I respect OSS, but thanks to the fact that it is so little used, it isn't very practical. For example, I certainly can switch to .ogg but it wouldn't work on our mp3 players nor our cd players. And before you tell me to buy new ones, we switched to Linux because it was free as in gratis as well as libre.

Then there is the issue of graphics drivers. The nv driver doesn't work at all -- if 300 fps in glxgears is working, I doubt it..even 2D performance sucks. This is a geforce 6800...hopefully nouveau will fit this.

EDIT : Regarding Freespire OSS, I don't think it is much of an issue..freespire was never meant to be 100% OSS, and now that there is GNewSense, the OSS purists can just use that.

Eddie Wilson
March 24th, 2007, 07:08 PM
I have used a purely OSS system..and no it doesn't really work for me. Sadly I have to balance propietary with OSS...even if it is a 90% OSS system.

I think people see it as an all or nothing question - either 100% OSS or 100% propietary. I interchange them. I respect OSS, but thanks to the fact that it is so little used, it isn't very practical. For example, I certainly can switch to .ogg but it wouldn't work on our mp3 players nor our cd players. And before you tell me to buy new ones, we switched to Linux because it was free as in gratis as well as libre.

Then there is the issue of graphics drivers. The nv driver doesn't work at all -- if 300 fps in glxgears is working, I doubt it..even 2D performance sucks. This is a geforce 6800...hopefully nouveau will fit this.

EDIT : Regarding Freespire OSS, I don't think it is much of an issue..freespire was never meant to be 100% OSS, and now that there is GNewSense, the OSS purists can just use that.

This is what computer users face. Its not our fault. Please don't degrade us OSS purists because we do what we do for our systems to work the way we need them to.
Eddie

Cannaregio
March 24th, 2007, 08:43 PM
For all the purists talk bout open this and open that what it comes down to is people want something that works out of the box and just does what they need to do.

Most people are not interested in some holy moldy war thats been going on since 1983.

People need flash codecs java sound modems video etc to just work.

This is really stupid.
People DO NOT need all that crap. People would be quite happy to DITCH all that crap.
Macromedia flash? Something so buggy and overbloated that you could puke for months just looking at the spaghetti disassembled code.
What's the purpose of following idiot lemmings on their way to the cliff?

The whole point is to have an ALTERNATIVE to all that proprietary, buggy, malwarish, overbloated crap.
A BETTER alternative, something that is leaner, quicker, open sourced, cleaner, free.

Now, please note: I could even understand you, if you would have said something like
'...as long as I think I have to, I prefer to have the option to install proprietary crap..."
But you are not saying that. Not at all.
You are saying, basically:
"...I want to transform GNU/Linux into a copy of windows..."

Why? No thanks.

Stick with windows, if that is what you really want. Good riddance.
You want all the crap and the frills? Already there, made -or rather copied- in Redmond for the zombies. Enjoy it.
You don't need a different OS at all.

GNU/Linux (btw: not Linux, Linux does not exist, never did: GNU/Linux is the name) is an ALTERNATIVE, not a copy/clone of a bad OS.
People that want Ubuntu to work 'like windows' should imho stick with windows.

Wake up: you are now using a DIFFERENT operating system (thanks God or Godzilla, whichever comes first in your Pantheon), so enjoy it, and do not try to masquerade it into a clone of an overbloated toy system like windows.

People want something that 'works out of the box'? It's a matter of drivers, but mostly they can easily already have it.
Threefolds: With windows, with MACOSx and with Ubuntu. All three main OSs DO work 'out of the box' afaikt.

But there are differences, great differences, important, vital, decisive differences... and these should NOT be reduced to subtle differences just because some incapable morons want to re-create their windows guinea pigs wheels inside GNU/Linux.

The main difference being the freedoms GNU/Linux gives you, those very freedoms you would like to sell out for nothing, stupid slave.

Eddie Wilson
March 24th, 2007, 09:07 PM
This is really stupid.
People DO NOT need all that crap. People would be quite happy to DITCH all that crap.
Macromedia flash? Something so buggy and overbloated that you could puke for months just looking at the spaghetti disassembled code.
What's the purpose of following idiot lemmings on their way to the cliff?

The whole point is to have an ALTERNATIVE to all that proprietary, buggy, malwarish, overbloated crap.
A BETTER alternative, something that is leaner, quicker, open sourced, cleaner, free.

Now, please note: I could even understand you, if you would have said something like
'...as long as I think I have to, I prefer to have the option to install proprietary crap..."
But you are not saying that. Not at all.
You are saying, basically:
"...I want to transform GNU/Linux into a copy of windows..."

Why? No thanks.

Stick with windows, if that is what you really want. Good riddance.
You want all the crap and the frills? Already there, made -or rather copied- in Redmond for the zombies. Enjoy it.
You don't need a different OS at all.

GNU/Linux (btw: not Linux, Linux does not exist, never did: GNU/Linux is the name) is an ALTERNATIVE, not a copy/clone of a bad OS.
People that want Ubuntu to work 'like windows' should imho stick with windows.

Wake up: you are now using a DIFFERENT operating system (thanks God or Godzilla, whichever comes first in your Pantheon), so enjoy it, and do not try to masquerade it into a clone of an overbloated toy system like windows.

People want something that 'works out of the box'? It's a matter of drivers, but mostly they can easily already have it.
Threefolds: With windows, with MACOSx and with Ubuntu. All three main OSs DO work 'out of the box' afaikt.

But there are differences, great differences, important, vital, decisive differences... and these should NOT be reduced to subtle differences just because some incapable morons want to re-create their windows guinea pigs wheels inside GNU/Linux.

The main difference being the freedoms GNU/Linux gives you, those very freedoms you would like to sell out for nothing, stupid slave.

:-({|=

neighborlee
March 27th, 2007, 05:51 PM
This is really stupid.
People DO NOT need all that crap. People would be quite happy to DITCH all that crap.
Macromedia flash? Something so buggy and overbloated that you could puke for months just looking at the spaghetti disassembled code.
What's the purpose of following idiot lemmings on their way to the cliff?

The whole point is to have an ALTERNATIVE to all that proprietary, buggy, malwarish, overbloated crap.
A BETTER alternative, something that is leaner, quicker, open sourced, cleaner, free.

Now, please note: I could even understand you, if you would have said something like
'...as long as I think I have to, I prefer to have the option to install proprietary crap..."
But you are not saying that. Not at all.
You are saying, basically:
"...I want to transform GNU/Linux into a copy of windows..."

Why? No thanks.

Stick with windows, if that is what you really want. Good riddance.
You want all the crap and the frills? Already there, made -or rather copied- in Redmond for the zombies. Enjoy it.
You don't need a different OS at all.

GNU/Linux (btw: not Linux, Linux does not exist, never did: GNU/Linux is the name) is an ALTERNATIVE, not a copy/clone of a bad OS.
People that want Ubuntu to work 'like windows' should imho stick with windows.

Wake up: you are now using a DIFFERENT operating system (thanks God or Godzilla, whichever comes first in your Pantheon), so enjoy it, and do not try to masquerade it into a clone of an overbloated toy system like windows.

People want something that 'works out of the box'? It's a matter of drivers, but mostly they can easily already have it.
Threefolds: With windows, with MACOSx and with Ubuntu. All three main OSs DO work 'out of the box' afaikt.

But there are differences, great differences, important, vital, decisive differences... and these should NOT be reduced to subtle differences just because some incapable morons want to re-create their windows guinea pigs wheels inside GNU/Linux.

The main difference being the freedoms GNU/Linux gives you, those very freedoms you would like to sell out for nothing, stupid slave.

incapable mororns huh..what a lovely sentiment :popcorn:

You need to go back to your bible ( or whatever you follow) and look up what it makes you for using such words...you are not very nice at all.

We all 'get' that OSS is kewl and desireable..but ogg isn't in widespread use, nv isn't good enough for alot of things and its slow even for 2d.

It is prob. futile trying to argue with people like you who use such harsh words against people that are trying to just show that OSS vs Propreitary isn't such a black and white issues some people might wish it were.

'most' people 'need' the proprietary BLOBS , so to suggest its somewhat bad, vile or disgusting to 'use' them , indiates that you are FUDing, and we all know what that means dont we ;)

THere is another side to this...ubuntu is now making it all automatic to get those BLOBS easily including the nvidia drivers that so many protest against..so if your that 'against' these things, you are in the wrong camp to begin with , and should stop harrasing the users that are here to take advantage of forwards thinking code. Why pretel, do you think widnows maintains the currrent market share,- Ill tell you it is because windows is 'easy' to use ( and at least maintain ) thereby 'attracting' the vendor community which is why hardware and windows go so well together. Ubuntu is starting to get this now and I suspect ubuntu should steadily start to see much better vendor suppport from here on out, considering also the inclusion soon of cnr.com. It is about time ;)

cheers
nl

Cannaregio
March 27th, 2007, 08:38 PM
incapable mororns huh..what a lovely sentiment
You need to go back to your bible ( or whatever you follow) and look up what it makes you for using such words...you are not very nice at all.


Sorry if I came out harsh. But that's what I think, and I believe that you should not drown a discussion (hopefully this is a discussion) because of 'politically correctness'. Messageboards are places where people from different habitats interchange, and some elbowing may happen.



We all 'get' that OSS is kewl and desireable..but ogg isn't in widespread use, nv isn't good enough for alot of things and its slow even for 2d.

It is prob. futile trying to argue with people like you who use such harsh words against people that are trying to just show that OSS vs Propreitary isn't such a black and white issues some people might wish it were.


Again, I agree totally. But the fact that nothing is black & white, or cowboys & indian girls, does not mean that there really are those MANY shades of gray.



'most' people 'need' the proprietary BLOBS , so to suggest its somewhat bad, vile or disgusting to 'use' them , indiates that you are FUDing, and we all know what that means dont we


Here is where I really and sincerely do NOT agree with you at all. So I'll explain again:
'most' people DO NOT 'need' the proprietary BLOBS
and the whole point of Gnu/Linux is to avoid that proprietary crap, as simple as it is and sounds.
If you really think you need proprietary solutions, you already have two full-fledged operating systems: windows (with all the advantages and downsides we all know) or/and MAC OSx (with all the advantages and downsides we all know). The 'raison d'ętre' of "our" operating system is DIFFERENT.
Not realizing this is an insult to all developers that spend their time -for free- to give you and me and us all a top-notch alternative to that very proprietary crap you de facto defend.




Why pretel, do you think widnows maintains the currrent market share,- Ill tell you it is because windows is 'easy' to use ( and at least maintain ) thereby 'attracting' the vendor community which is why hardware and windows go so well together.


Nope. I don't agree at all here either.
"Ease of use" is surely not and never has been the reason of windows' market share. If it were, MACs would rule the world. But they don't, and GNU/Linux doesn't either. No wonder.
Windows' market share is based on market dominance and monopolistic positions of force. Wake up.
Poor solutions with big monopolistic clout beat better solutions with less monopolistic clout. That's the whole point of the oligarchic system we all live in.
As usual when you leave all marges to those beloved 'free market forces' you get only the crap you deserve.

In fact 'market forces' don't usually work for you, ya know, and why the hell should they?
They work for their own profit, which 98% times means screwing you and 1% means giving you the bare minimum so that you don't run away in horror and disgust. (And 1% means convincing you that everyting is nice and dandy if you only let them do whatever they want without any regulation whatsoever).
Look at windows (and maybe also at the inbastardized linux mutant you would want to prepare for our future).
D'you really really believe, really, that anyone in his right mind would still use such a buggy, dangerous and prone to catastrophe OS in presence of (many) valid alternatives?
Nope, if they only would know.
Yet they do use it, that's true. But not for the 'ease of use', coz of inertia and the simple fact that if you buy a computer you have to jump through firerings in order to find something that's not windozed (a propos monopolistic clout).

But lo and wonder: the moment the very morons you defend DO realize, they DO switch, of course. Look at these forums. That's good.
Alas, that is also, I believe, incidentally the very reason we are getting recently so many calls -even here- for a überwindozed linux OS.
The zombies miss their daily proprietary dose. The junkies are still addict.

Yet, yet even morons are not totally stupid. Give them an OS that does what they need WITHOUT proprietary, slow, cumbersome and prone to error and viruses crap and they'll switch.

No Photoshop? They'll soon even do with Gimp. So badly they need to escape from the proprietary crap.
The moment they know, the moment they understand... they will switch.
And this moment is nigh.
After all, rejoyce: that's what they are doing in droves right now coz of the vista crapola :-)

neighborlee
March 27th, 2007, 10:09 PM
Sorry if I came out harsh. But that's what I think, and I believe that you should not drown a discussion (hopefully this is a discussion) because of 'politically correctness'. Messageboards are places where people from different habitats interchange, and some elbowing may happen.



Again, I agree totally. But the fact that nothing is black & white, or cowboys & indian girls, does not mean that there really are those MANY shades of gray.



Here is where I really and sincerely do NOT agree with you at all. So I'll explain again:
'most' people DO NOT 'need' the proprietary BLOBS
and the whole point of Gnu/Linux is to avoid that proprietary crap, as simple as it is and sounds.
If you really think you need proprietary solutions, you already have two full-fledged operating systems: windows (with all the advantages and downsides we all know) or/and MAC OSx (with all the advantages and downsides we all know). The 'raison d'ętre' of "our" operating system is DIFFERENT.
Not realizing this is an insult to all developers that spend their time -for free- to give you and me and us all a top-notch alternative to that very proprietary crap you de facto defend.




Nope. I don't agree at all here either.
"Ease of use" is surely not and never has been the reason of windows' market share. If it were, MACs would rule the world. But they don't, and GNU/Linux doesn't either. No wonder.
Windows' market share is based on market dominance and monopolistic positions of force. Wake up.
Poor solutions with big monopolistic clout beat better solutions with less monopolistic clout. That's the whole point of the oligarchic system we all live in.
As usual when you leave all marges to those beloved 'free market forces' you get only the crap you deserve.

In fact 'market forces' don't usually work for you, ya know, and why the hell should they?
They work for their own profit, which 98% times means screwing you and 1% means giving you the bare minimum so that you don't run away in horror and disgust. (And 1% means convincing you that everyting is nice and dandy if you only let them do whatever they want without any regulation whatsoever).
Look at windows (and maybe also at the inbastardized linux mutant you would want to prepare for our future).
D'you really really believe, really, that anyone in his right mind would still use such a buggy, dangerous and prone to catastrophe OS in presence of (many) valid alternatives?
Nope, if they only would know.
Yet they do use it, that's true. But not for the 'ease of use', coz of inertia and the simple fact that if you buy a computer you have to jump through firerings in order to find something that's not windozed (a propos monopolistic clout).

But lo and wonder: the moment the very morons you defend DO realize, they DO switch, of course. Look at these forums. That's good.
Alas, that is also, I believe, incidentally the very reason we are getting recently so many calls -even here- for a überwindozed linux OS.
The zombies miss their daily proprietary dose. The junkies are still addict.

Yet, yet even morons are not totally stupid. Give them an OS that does what they need WITHOUT proprietary, slow, cumbersome and prone to error and viruses crap and they'll switch.

No Photoshop? They'll soon even do with Gimp. So badly they need to escape from the proprietary crap.
The moment they know, the moment they understand... they will switch.
And this moment is nigh.
After all, rejoyce: that's what they are doing in droves right now coz of the vista crapola :-)

using 'morons' , again I reiterate is not a welcome useage on these forums,,,Linux is a OS that is meant to be used for the benefit of everyone..talking like this is to no ones benefit , but your own ego and that is selfish and undesireable, - and is definitley not in sync with a universal mindset where everyone works together for the betterment of our species.

oh btw.mac did not make it because they were very expensive..they might now due to the intel switch..we'll see ;)

and linux haS suffered all the time , because using linux has meant you had to be a 'geek' or suffer wasted time to get things to 'just work' like the easy way they have in windows...


The 'raison d'ętre' of "our" operating system is DIFFERENT.
Not realizing this is an insult to all developers that spend their time -for free- to give you and me and us all a top-notch alternative to that very proprietary crap you de facto defend.

well that is interesting :0....no, linux is not different...windows also has 'OSS' so lets no muddy the waters shall we ;)....linux is about being free, for those that can't afford to spend $xxx amounts of money for a decent OS, and of course its also about making us 'safe' in a virus ridden world of course,- and many other things too but i wont go into them all for this discourse. If you think the flash driver is crap, then clearly you dont need it yourself or goto sites that use it...or maybe you dont goto cnn.com, while others do, so lets no muddy the waters with your speical view of what linux 'should' be...it should be flexible enough to be good for everyone , not just OSS purists ;)....and that is exactly what ubuntu is now, and will become even moreso once cnr.com is integrated . Im so glad to see them making the 3d drivers easier to install, as now windows users coming to linux willl find it easier to deal with ( since atm nvidia has no universal installer.exe like there is for windows ) .

Linux is about choice,,,if you think having only OSS components is what it 'should' be, then you do not have linux's best interest as heart.


cheers
nl

deanlinkous
March 27th, 2007, 10:11 PM
To choose something different, because it is different and then try to turn it more into what you wanted to get away from, to turn it into something similar or less-different......kind of defeats the purpose of choosing something DIFFERENT in the first place. Doesn't it?

deanlinkous
March 27th, 2007, 10:12 PM
Ubuntu is 'addding' these things now so im sure our market share will increase sharply soon.



Linspire and Xandros and others added them years ago........why aren't we ruling the world already?

deanlinkous
March 27th, 2007, 10:15 PM
, because using linux has meant you had to be a 'geek' or suffer wasted time to get things to 'just work' like the easy way they have in windows...

If you want things to work like in windows - why aren't you just using windows?????

neighborlee
March 27th, 2007, 10:28 PM
If you want things to work like in windows - why aren't you just using windows?????

That is obviously not meant to propogate a decent discussion or help someone in any meaningful way....if you dont want to help people use linux ( which is more stable and safer overall than windows due to its design, and its also FREE meaning people whom are POOR can use it too ), then I think your reasons are selfish,,,so you see how this thread can be turned right back at you.

cheers
nl

Cannaregio
March 27th, 2007, 11:31 PM
and linux has suffered all the time , because using linux has meant you had to be a 'geek' or suffer wasted time to get things to 'just work' like the easy way they have in windows...

Nope.
In fact more and more often it seems to me that GNU/Linux systems recognize hardware BETTER than windoze systems.
Here an example: ethernet (no wireless... simple intel ethernet) recognized by Ubuntu (on a HP Pavillon, no less), and NOT recognized by windows XP pro.
(Proof at hand on request).

Software 'just working' is a different matter. But there anyone that can, de facto, does "sell out" his proprietary crap and as soon as possible does indeed switch (usually with gusto) to open source appz, and we all know what this means (in the short and especially - and hopefully - in the long term).

Again, things do not 'just work' in windows, as everyone "upgrading to vista" (that's a rather sarcastic terminology, he: an oxymoron) can testify.

"selfish and undesireable" is imnsho (in my not so humble opinion) to try to steer linux towards a windoze clone as if that were a proof of some 'liberty of choice".
That's licking the boots of some proprietary masters.
Noone (but zombified 'proprietary snuff' junkies) could crave for it.
(That's indeed a tag exagerated and in fact meant paradoxically, but I do wish to make the point, duh :-)

Let me state it again.
I'll quote myself (since I like it :-):


But lo and wonder: the moment the very morons you defend DO realize, they DO switch, of course. Look at these forums. That's good.
Alas, that is also, I believe, incidentally the very reason we are getting recently so many calls -even here- for a überwindozed linux OS.
The zombies miss their daily proprietary dose. The junkies are still addict.

So I do indeed believe that asking/begging/craving/condoning proprietary stuff -as you do- is a bad sign.
Now, understand me right, I'm not a fanatic purist (indeed I wouldn't use Ubuntu if I were), but still: there are limits.
Believe me, you don't need proprietary shames. You can live without such an addiction.
May seem hard at the beginning, but you will manage it.
I'm sure.
Tommy in, belly out (or is it the other way round?)

Cure yourself: you are definitely ill, or at least bad informed.

neighborlee
March 28th, 2007, 12:17 AM
Nope.
In fact more and more often it seems to me that GNU/Linux systems recognize hardware BETTER than windoze systems.
Here an example: ethernet (no wireless... simple intel ethernet) recognized by Ubuntu (on a HP Pavillon, no less), and NOT recognized by windows XP pro.
(Proof at hand on request).

Software 'just working' is a different matter. But there anyone that can, de facto, does "sell out" his proprietary crap and as soon as possible does indeed switch (usually with gusto) to open source appz, and we all know what this means (in the short and especially - and hopefully - in the long term).

Again, things do not 'just work' in windows, as everyone "upgrading to vista" (that's a rather sarcastic terminology, he: an oxymoron) can testify.

"selfish and undesireable" is imnsho (in my not so humble opinion) to try to steer linux towards a windoze clone as if that were a proof of some 'liberty of choice".
That's licking the boots of some proprietary masters.
Noone (but zombified 'proprietary snuff' junkies) could crave for it.
(That's indeed a tag exagerated and in fact meant paradoxically, but I do wish to make the point, duh :-)

Let me state it again.
I'll quote myself (since I like it :-):



So I do indeed believe that asking/begging/craving/condoning proprietary stuff -as you do- is a bad sign.
Now, understand me right, I'm not a fanatic purist (indeed I wouldn't use Ubuntu if I were), but still: there are limits.
Believe me, you don't need proprietary shames. You can live without such an addiction.
May seem hard at the beginning, but you will manage it.
I'm sure.
Tommy in, belly out (or is it the other way round?)

Cure yourself: you are definitely ill, or at least bad informed.

The only bad sign, is your willingness to be viscious, - another 'choice' , and one clearly you have made. Dont impose that choice on others , because while trying to remove the stick from mine eye you have forgottgen about the log in your own.

I reiterate since its clear you missed it in my previous post..Linux is about 'choice' , and to refuse to give only a limited subset of choices based on your shortsided views of what linux 'should' be , shows that your goals are not for linux and the people who use it but for your own delusional grandiose visions of the OS you think it should be .

Thank god there are more people who agree choice is preferrable, than those that would deny this first ammendment right afforded to everyone.



cheers
nl

saulgoode
March 28th, 2007, 01:18 AM
Thank god there are more people who agree choice is preferrable, than those that would deny this first ammendment right afforded to everyone.

I should like to see the choice of a proprietary-free version of *spire continued to be offered.

finferflu
March 28th, 2007, 02:06 AM
well that is interesting :0....no, linux is not different...windows also has 'OSS' so lets no muddy the waters shall we ;)....linux is about being free, for those that can't afford to spend $xxx amounts of money for a decent OS, and of course its also about making us 'safe' in a virus ridden world of course,- and many other things too but i wont go into them all for this discourse.




That is obviously not meant to propogate a decent discussion or help someone in any meaningful way....if you dont want to help people use linux ( which is more stable and safer overall than windows due to its design, and its also FREE meaning people whom are POOR can use it too ), then I think your reasons are selfish,,,so you see how this thread can be turned right back at you.

cheers
nl
I would just like to say that Linux is not FREE in the sense that it's gratis, that's not the point, and if you miss that, you miss the whole spirit of it. Maybe English language is not helpful here, usually people use the French word "libre", and libre is not gratis. Linux is free as in free speech, and as a consequence of that, it's also free as gratis. It's not born out of the need of providing an OS for the poor people, it's just born out of the need of creativity, if we can call it so. So, Linux is not charity, and it's not cheap. Saying otherwise would offend badly the spirit of the whole project. And I guess that's what Cannaregio is doing, trying to defend the high values of software libre. Now, of course freedom is freedom of choice, but calling an OS inferior only because it doesn't support inferior technology can sound offensive. I, too, use proprietary stuff, but as soon as I can get a free alternative, I'll be more than happy to dump all that. I consider proprietary stuff as a hinderance, in fact. I could live very well without that stuff, because the free stuff offers a lot, but I am forced to use that only because some people have chosen it. A good example is ogg vs mp3. The ogg format is many times better than mp3, but I'm forced to use the latter only because people have chosen to create portable players that only support the mp3 format. I find that very annoying...

My 2 cents...

neighborlee
March 28th, 2007, 05:05 PM
I would just like to say that Linux is not FREE in the sense that it's gratis, that's not the point, and if you miss that, you miss the whole spirit of it. Maybe English language is not helpful here, usually people use the French word "libre", and libre is not gratis. Linux is free as in free speech, and as a consequence of that, it's also free as gratis. It's not born out of the need of providing an OS for the poor people, it's just born out of the need of creativity, if we can call it so. So, Linux is not charity, and it's not cheap. Saying otherwise would offend badly the spirit of the whole project. And I guess that's what Cannaregio is doing, trying to defend the high values of software libre. Now, of course freedom is freedom of choice, but calling an OS inferior only because it doesn't support inferior technology can sound offensive. I, too, use proprietary stuff, but as soon as I can get a free alternative, I'll be more than happy to dump all that. I consider proprietary stuff as a hinderance, in fact. I could live very well without that stuff, because the free stuff offers a lot, but I am forced to use that only because some people have chosen it. A good example is ogg vs mp3. The ogg format is many times better than mp3, but I'm forced to use the latter only because people have chosen to create portable players that only support the mp3 format. I find that very annoying...

My 2 cents...

The last time I checked, it was free to download 'most' distros and that is a well known fact which has been true for a very very very very long time. Since when is it not good that poor people are given tools that bring them out of the tide of inequity ??? I definitely call that charity, and according to the good bible ( and many other holy books) that IS a 'good thing', regardless that you fail to see it.

Proprietary things are only a hindrance to those that see thing black and white..there is a grey area here, and its called the facts. The facts are that people 'need' and 'want' to goto web sites , for which atm there are 'zero' alternatives that use ogg, or gnash ( not stable) or any other codec that would could be used as replacements for,- as you say proprietary stuff :)

I prefer ogg too, but mp3 has the market atm and unless ogg is considered better in every possible way compared to mp3 I dont see things changing. ( i have not used ogg enough to be able to verify those topics , has anyone ? )

If people aren't willing to cite alternatives for these things, why bother getting all excited and throw out clever catch phrases about these issues. ThaT is a false doctrine.

That is not the sole reason for linux to exist and I want to state for the record that I am fully cognisant of the fact that linux also exists in large part because software is available, changeable and shareable :-)

That does not mean its void of choice, like some unruly zealots want to believe, in their unholy quest to disarm 'choice' :-)

Can't claim choice is good and what linux is all about, and on other hand take choice away from other users ;)


cheers
nl

deanlinkous
March 28th, 2007, 05:38 PM
WE (well you anyway) made mp3 the market, it is up to US (well you anyway) to make ogg the market if you TRULY believe in free software

deanlinkous
March 28th, 2007, 05:40 PM
You wouldn't believe in a good book and want to add some *evil* to it would you? Even if it meant you got to do some fun (evil) things? Now if those fun things could be done in a non-evil manner then isn't it worth waiting for and doing without - if you truly believed in not giving in to temptation just to do those fun(evil) things. :D

finferflu
March 28th, 2007, 09:11 PM
The last time I checked, it was free to download 'most' distros and that is a well known fact which has been true for a very very very very long time. Since when is it not good that poor people are given tools that bring them out of the tide of inequity ??? I definitely call that charity, and according to the good bible ( and many other holy books) that IS a 'good thing', regardless that you fail to see it.

Proprietary things are only a hindrance to those that see thing black and white..there is a grey area here, and its called the facts. The facts are that people 'need' and 'want' to goto web sites , for which atm there are 'zero' alternatives that use ogg, or gnash ( not stable) or any other codec that would could be used as replacements for,- as you say proprietary stuff :)

I prefer ogg too, but mp3 has the market atm and unless ogg is considered better in every possible way compared to mp3 I dont see things changing. ( i have not used ogg enough to be able to verify those topics , has anyone ? )

If people aren't willing to cite alternatives for these things, why bother getting all excited and throw out clever catch phrases about these issues. ThaT is a false doctrine.

That is not the sole reason for linux to exist and I want to state for the record that I am fully cognisant of the fact that linux also exists in large part because software is available, changeable and shareable :-)

That does not mean its void of choice, like some unruly zealots want to believe, in their unholy quest to disarm 'choice' :-)

Can't claim choice is good and what linux is all about, and on other hand take choice away from other users ;)


cheers
nl
I actually pointed out that the true nature of Linux is not charity, so if you look at this from that perspective, you end up with a very different cognition of what Linux is. Of course, it HAS to be gratis in order to accomplish its results, and it was made gratis only to give opportunity to everyone to contribute to the project, and not to give it away to poor people. And obviously, since it's gratis it can be used for charities (Shuttleworth himself uses it for helping out people who can't afford MS), but that's not the main purpose of Linux. The freedom that Linux provides is not in monetary terms, it's in intellectual terms, and of course it creates a practical realities - sharing communities, charities, and especially advanced technology.
I've never talked about restricting freedom of choice, I was only trying to put things into perspective, since as I mentioned already, I use proprietary stuff, too.

Adamant1988
March 29th, 2007, 04:15 AM
I grow increasingly concerned about Linspire. A good idea gone horribly wrong, am I just glad they opened up the CNR technology, because it is a good idea. When this company disappears at least they will have contributed something.

deanlinkous
March 29th, 2007, 05:42 AM
have you seen anything opened yet? :D

Adamant1988
March 29th, 2007, 11:09 AM
have you seen anything opened yet? :D

Valid point, what I meant is that the next version is supposed to be open. deanlinkous, it's time you did better things, Linspire and Freespire are long past the point where no one cares about them anymore. Now is the time to go enjoy that free software, the bad guys are off in hiding.

deanlinkous
March 29th, 2007, 07:14 PM
Yes hopefully it will be open. The question is - will it be such a insignificant piece of code to have no meaning whatsoever?

igknighted
March 29th, 2007, 09:09 PM
Im so glad to see them making the 3d drivers easier to install, as now windows users coming to linux willl find it easier to deal with ( since atm nvidia has no universal installer.exe like there is for windows ) .

Linux is about choice,,,if you think having only OSS components is what it 'should' be, then you do not have linux's best interest as heart.


cheers
nl

Your intentions are good, but the use of CNR is far from an ideal solution. The reason linux is so difficult to code for is that system are very diverse. This is very beneficial if you think like a biologist... diversity prevents viruses and malware from wiping out an entire community. However, from a support standpoint, it makes things very difficult. Maybe I run a custom kernel, or maybe I want to install an app to /opt because I want to try it out without replacing the version I already have on my system, or a million more maybes... CNR, and all these other efforts to "smooth over" the installing of various things, just teach people to be dependant upon these crutches.

Maybe I am biased because when I started using linux I used Slackware... and I had to learn everything manually. And as much as I hated it then, I am so grateful now, because I understand linux so much better. All I would have liked is better documentation. If every distro spent all the time they coded away at shortcuts like CNR and others, we could all have documentation like Gentoo, or better, and everyone would be better off.

I love the terminal, but I am not saying everyone should have to use it. I am saying that you don't need to understand the terminal to make use of programs like synaptic. How is installing from synaptic harder than CNR? It isn't. So why do we want to mix repo's with CNR? Do we realize the dependency issues that would cause? Do we realize that CNR is famous for old or broken packages? Who is going to maintain these packages? CNR staff can't maintain packages for Ubuntu, Freespire, Suse, Fedora, etc., and the Ubuntu staff can't be expected to maintain the standard Ubuntu repo's as well as CNR stuff... I see this as a disaster.

When (and if) CNR does actually come to Ubuntu, I will not use it. I do not find it any easier, nor do I find it gives me any more options or control over my system... quite the contrary it gives me less. Lets drop this nonsense, and build a really good manual. Lets put that manual on the desktop of every install by default so you cannot miss it, and let people learn for themselves the right way to do stuff.

EDIT: And to the topic of the thread, lets not forget this is freespire. No one uses freespire who is an OSS enthusiast. So if they don't offer an OSS options, well then I don't care. If you care that much, gNewSense and Debian and Fedora are waiting for you with open arms. And god bless you, I approve. But if Windows User Joe Blow picks Freespire, and theres no OSS edition... well, lets just say its not the end of the world. And once he sees how awesome linux and FOSS is, then he looks around and goes gee, I'm gonna use Fedora, or Debian. Its a step. One at a time.

igknighted
March 29th, 2007, 09:16 PM
WE (well you anyway) made mp3 the market, it is up to US (well you anyway) to make ogg the market if you TRULY believe in free software

Good point, we cannot all be sheep. We took the first step by stepping away from windows, and for some it is steps at a time... but mp3 and proprietary drivers (while valuable for the time being) must not become something we lean on (like CNR itself). For now, fine, I can deal with so proprietary crap. But once we use that to build our base, then we can say to Nvidia, or the wifi card makers, give us what we want or we wil, as a group, switch to brand X (Intel, Ralink, w/e)... and once one cracks, which they will, then the rest will follow. I'm not fighting this stuff for now, but we can never accept it as the way it will be. That goes for mp3, drivers, and many other things.

I will make one exception. With gaming and really high end software (CAD and other such products) are perfectly acceptable to remain proprietary, and we need to prove that linux users will buy these (not so much individuals, but corporations).