Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 20th Mar 2005 09:26 UTC
Oracle and SUN Aalaap Ghag reviews the Xandros Desktop OS 3 OCE in his 3-page article.
Order by: Score:

That it's not a Xandros fault that Linux is not ready. Well, maybe it's not, but it's Xandros fault for not having a missing libs. Hell, I can apt-get (slapt-get, too) k3b now, and I'll get it without missing libs. That makes my Debian/Ubuntu/Slackware ready for desktop? ;-)

Flaming
by rulle on Sun 20th Mar 2005 10:27 UTC

Idiotic flame at the end of the article. "Linux" sure is "ready" for me and many others

Flamebait
by Ole on Sun 20th Mar 2005 10:31 UTC

Flamebait like this shouldn't appear on OSNews

Is Linux ready?
by Tuffy on Sun 20th Mar 2005 10:38 UTC

I am trying to think what the author means by "Linux is not ready"? I was about to lauch into a defence of Linux on the desktop, but have been around long enough to know that it would only bring counter claims. It amazes me that some people take this so serious. For me Linux is ready. Those who find other o/s work for them, good. Although I think the author was a little unfair in his comments. I have used Xandros and know it has some constraints. Trying go pass them will bring problems. The author knew this but went ahead anyway.

Re: Is Linux ready?
by ralph on Sun 20th Mar 2005 10:45 UTC

"Although I think the author was a little unfair in his comments. I have used Xandros and know it has some constraints. Trying go pass them will bring problems. The author knew this but went ahead anyway."

But that's the funny thing about this review, the author uses a crippled version of a commercial linux distribution, tries to bypass the constraints inherent in this crippled version, has problems and blames them on Linux, declaring that Linux isn't ready, though the problems obviously stem from using a crippled version of a commercial distribution.

Now if that isn't impressive reasoning, what is?

Pathetic
by Anonymous on Sun 20th Mar 2005 11:14 UTC

Another distro-hopping rabbit. The writer should seriously be made to run his WinXP with no 3rd party applications as punishment. I bet he doesn't pay for any of his software. He can stick to the free wordpad and outlook express/ie5 that came with it. Maybe he can burn cds with a ciggarette lighter. Then we can see who's ready for the Desktop - idiot.

Dupe?
by Anonymous on Sun 20th Mar 2005 11:34 UTC

Is it just me or didn't we already have a 3-page review - see http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=9848&limit=no - of Xandros 3 OCE a month ago - do we *really* need another one? Now a review of Fedora Core 4 Test 1 (and its complete mess-up - arguably the worst RH/FC test release of all time) might be more interesting (all we've had so far is the release announcement).

Re: Xanrdos Review
by New Mexico Linux User on Sun 20th Mar 2005 12:24 UTC

As far as comercial Linux is concerned, Linspire is much better than Xandros. Just my personal technical opinion having run both in a testing environment. I am sure there are opinions for the opposite.

I run both Windows and Linux servers in a large academic production environment over the last five years. Both have their strengths and weaknesses in varying degrees.

This review is akin to reviewing a 120-day "student" limited "training" CD version of 2000, XP or the Server line and saying, "Look, see, it sucks!"

A server is only as strong as the ID10T behind the console.

RE: K3B
by Fizzol on Sun 20th Mar 2005 14:08 UTC

K3B runs fine on Xandros, you just have to check the user forums to find the compatible package, not hard.

Sorry guys
by bman08 on Sun 20th Mar 2005 14:26 UTC

Apparently you missed the election, but Mr. Ghag has been appointed arbiter of linux readiness. The ball is in his court and he's found linux, not xandros but linux overall, wanting. Nevermind the fact that a fresh install of windows has no sound, networking, 800x600 video, no usb, no firewire and can't find my hard drive without a boot floppy, it looks like we're all going to have to switch back. Thanks, Mr. Ghag, for getting me up to speed on the 'readiness' of my OS... and *snif* thanks Linux for screwing up your one chance to impress Aalaap Ghag.

Thanks also OSNews for running another one of these articles. Is it just me or are users of this site constantly complaining about the quality of the linux reviews, and yet nothing gets done. It's almost as if we're asking for new features in Gnome or something.

Ignorant Review
by gj on Sun 20th Mar 2005 17:15 UTC

"It had different sections for different flavors of Linux - Red Hat/Fedora, Debian, FreeBSD and so on."

Calling FreeBSD a Linux flavor. :|

Have to Agree
by Anonymous on Sun 20th Mar 2005 17:45 UTC

Xandros is indeed nice, but the comment at the end of the article is indeed right. You can't install practically anything unless you stump up for the next upgrade. This goes for all distributions unfortunately.

Xandros
by re on Sun 20th Mar 2005 18:03 UTC

I actually played around with Xandros about a year ago and found that Xandros does a few things fairly well and is intriguing however personally i felt that they were literally forcing you to do things THEIR way. Meaning dont even think about trying to hack it in any way shape or form as you'll find that this is just not a hackers distrobution. And if you question that on the user forum they will literally run you out of town. As i found out when I did this.

Its unfortunate that Xandros is going the way they are. They did an impressive job with their additions to the linux os but have apparently not emraced the openness of the open source idea at all. Why i have no idea. If they did i think many more people would use it including myself.

Afer using it for a few days I got so annoyed I moved back to Windows.

And the idea that all distros force you to upgrade or to go through hoops to install things is ludacris. WHich frankly is why i dont understand how any of the non free distros make money.

I mean these days the "freebie" versions are FAR FAR FAR better then any of the non freebie versions.

Also besides the quite functionality file explorer that they have in their distro their other claim to faim was the heavy integration of Crossover office which they literally were marketing as able to pretty much run all windows applications.

Well first off all thats just a blatant lie. Second of all Crossover ofice is showing extreme age at this point and again after i played around with it through crossover i longed for my windows box again.

Sorry for the Xandros rant but I think this distro in all forms is an extreme let down. Its all hype and no substance. Apparently not only are they trying to mimic microsoft in functionality of their product but also in how they are marketing it.

ANd i personally dont see the point of the freebie version of this at all except they are trying to use it as a market gimmick to get people to upgrade as the non free versions are the ones that actually have any real functionality.

So whats the point then????

Ignorant Review II
by Anon on Sun 20th Mar 2005 18:04 UTC

Anyone still using a mechanical ball mouse when optical mice are available at Newegg for less than six bucks is a few cards short of a deck, and should not be reviewing operating systems......

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?submit=property&DEPA=0

v lol, what a moron.
by Josh on Sun 20th Mar 2005 18:39 UTC
I don't know why most of you even visit this site
by Ronin on Sun 20th Mar 2005 18:53 UTC

After reading the flaming over the Gnome incident and just the comments in general about reviews, I don't understand why an awful lot of posters bother visiting this site. According to the comments read, the host is a flame baiting troll, the articles all suck, the authors are clueless trolls or "fucktards". I mean what is the point of aggravating yourself? If you get nothing out of any article and question the hosts integrity, isn't there a site less offensive to you?

Always problematic ...
by rudy on Sun 20th Mar 2005 18:55 UTC

All lot of these so called 'reviews' are always problematic. The reviewer tries out one distro and instantly cries havoc about all similar products, heck this even says that the kernel isn't ready for the desktop. Wow, like that is news. It makes me wonder how such an article makes it to OSnews.

There are multiple distro's available. If you don't like one, please research the idea behind the distro and look for one based on a different ideas that suit you better. But don't say that all those Linux distro's are all the same, because they aren't. To put in another way: there is more difference between SuSe and Debian than you'll find between W2K and XP to mention just something.
Also make a mental note for coming experiments to FIRST do the research in order to see if the distro fits your way of working, or your personal ideas of what a desktop should be. There are so many distro's out there these days, that there has to be one for everyone.

re (IP: ---.dyn.optonline.ne
I personally think it is a whole lot of BS to say that the distro forces you to work in a certain way and that you don't like that. Guess what? That is what we call 'product specific behavior'. Don't like it? Switch to something you do like ... SuSe, Fedora, Ubuntu, Amiga, Solaris, Beos, Windows, whatever. Don't try to make something in something it simply isn't. You weren't born with a start button and spyware, you know ... it was forced on you. Remember?

Personally I think Linux has come a long way. I really do. Eg. I think SuSe 9.2-9.3 is a great Desktop system for most private - but definately the ordinary SoHo user. And then there is a long line of very stable distro's, all based on their own specific ideas on what an OS should be. They are polished, stable and very user friendly.

On a personal account, I must admit that I do ALL my work with Mac OS X. Not because I think it is technically superior to Linux or windows, but because it fits my idea on an OS and offers me all the tools I need for my job and offers me a way of processing that fits my personality (ENFP). Therefore, from MY point of view, OS X is the most workable OS around. But I keep checking 6 distro's a year. And who knows that one day ....

Btw, in this field I must give Windows some credits. Their rate of innovation forces me to check on their new distribution once in every 5 years? That does safe me a lot of time. Next one planned for 'somewhere' in 2006 (so they promise). Good for them, especially since I will compare 'm against OS X 10.4.5 or whatever version Tiger is at around that time.

Re: Ignorant Review II
by David on Sun 20th Mar 2005 18:55 UTC

Anyone still using a mechanical ball mouse when optical mice are available at Newegg for less than six bucks is a few cards short of a deck, and should not be reviewing operating systems......

Ignorant comment.

I have a mechanical ball mouse simply because I have a PS/2 port, I don't want all my USB ports taken up and I might as well use it because it works. That's not the point though.

His USB keyboard should work fine everywhere.

Xandros Desktop OS 3 OCE Review
by Anonymous on Sun 20th Mar 2005 18:59 UTC

One of the worst "reviews" by an obviously way underqualified reviewer I have ever read.

Not sure what your point was...
by re on Sun 20th Mar 2005 19:33 UTC

"personally think it is a whole lot of BS to say that the distro forces you to work in a certain way and that you don't like that. Guess what? That is what we call 'product specific behavior'. Don't like it? Switch to something you do like ... SuSe, Fedora, Ubuntu, Amiga, Solaris, Beos, Windows, whatever. Don't try to make something in something it simply isn't. You weren't born with a start button and spyware, you know ... it was forced on you. Remember?"

Frankly im not sure what you are trying to say here.

What i was trying to say was that while it seems Xandros is marketing itself as a flexible powerful distro you will find that in fact it is not. With other non free distros you know essentially what you are getting and you know to expect trouble if you push the distro beyond what it was designed for. Such as Linspire and a few others.

If i tried any one of these I would know exactly what they can and cant do because the companies are up front about what their distros are for.

When Xandros was becoming more well known they seemed to be marketing it as THE linux distro with all of the bells and whistles that anybody from hackers to newbies could want.

So when I tried it at first I did think it was the greatest distro around and was amazed at how much i liked it. But then i started playing around with some very basic stuff. Including their abysmal applications installer which is also one of their claims to fame. And it was all downhill from there.

And yes within the linux communitee obviously each distro has its own unique feature sets but overall once you because faimiliar with them you kow there pros and cons. With Xandros i ended up not really knowing what the distro is supposed to be about. Is it for linux newbies? IS it for so called business professionals? Is it for linux hackers???? I still havent figured that one out.

And their ducmentation and support is abysmal. WHich i find odd personally as freebie versions like gentoo debian and fedora have incredible support thats completely free.

So in other words while this distro is interesting which i think it trully is its fails in many places. So i gues i wont be getting a call from Xandros to be a marketing rep anytime soon.

:-)

Re: Ignorant Review II B
by Anon on Sun 20th Mar 2005 19:58 UTC

Dear Dave,

Newegg has a four port USB card for $9.50; that's about $2.50 per extra USB port; I put one of these in an old XP system here at the house recently, to plug in our iPods, which need USB 2.0. Works great.

I tuned up a computer at a friend's house recently, used by the kids; had a mechanical ball mouse which was simply hideous. Cleaned it, tuned it up, but it was still essentially unusable. Putting my money where my mouth is, I bought them an optical mouse on sale.

Hey, Ebay has an IBM PC Junior for sale, if you threw in a few extra bucks, you could probably get the original Chiclet Keyboard to use with your mechanical ball mouse.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4193&item=51...

Re: Re: Ignorant Review II B
by Anonymous on Sun 20th Mar 2005 20:27 UTC

Newegg has a four port USB card for $9.50; that's about $2.50 per extra USB port; I put one of these in an old XP system here at the house recently, to plug in our iPods, which need USB 2.0. Works great.

Oh wow.

Sorry, but mechanical ball mouses still work great and they don't needlessly take up USB ports - which is what I said before. There's also still quite a lot of them in the world, and they're still cheaper than optical mouses.

I tuned up a computer at a friend's house recently, used by the kids; had a mechanical ball mouse which was simply hideous. Cleaned it, tuned it up, but it was still essentially unusable. Putting my money where my mouth is, I bought them an optical mouse on sale.

Oh wow, you saved those poor kids from a mechanical ball mouse that you thought was unusable! You hero! How do you tune up a ball mouse - apart from breaking it?

However, your original point (which escapes me) is bollocks because the reviewer was complaining about not getting his USB keyboard working. Whether he has a ball mouse or not is neither here not there.

Do you have a point at all?

RE: Have to Agree
by San on Sun 20th Mar 2005 20:33 UTC

Xandros is indeed nice, but the comment at the end of the article is indeed right. You can't install practically anything unless you stump up for the next upgrade. This goes for all distributions unfortunately.

No...actually it doesn't. Installing software in Suse has always been very easy, as soon as I found Guru's rpms. Installing anything in Ubuntu worked perfectly. I installed some Slackware packages in Vectorlinux, compiled others from source, and others like Apollon and Firefox provide their own installer. Thunderbird doesn't even NEED one, you just copy an entire directory. And so on and so on.

The point is, when I want to install something, I search around on the forums before I actually do it. Installing soft IS something that can easily go wrong, but 2 minutes of searching is all it takes to find the right way.

A couple responses.
by Axord on Sun 20th Mar 2005 20:47 UTC

@rudy:

I've always suspected that NFs find OS X comfortable.
(I'm an INTP)


@San:

The point is, when I want to install something, I search around on the forums before I actually do it. Installing soft IS something that can easily go wrong, but 2 minutes of searching is all it takes to find the right way.

This behavior may be easy, but to some computer newbies learning that this behavior exists and is effective is a difficult process.

jebus
by mattb on Sun 20th Mar 2005 21:01 UTC

this guy most definately shouldnt be reviewing operating systems. he aparently didnt read any documentation about using xandros with third party packages. his big selling points were that it installed in 20 mins on his machine, and xfm looks like explorer (personally, i dont like konq OR explorer, but i would rather use konq any day). his one negative point was that you couldnt use packages built for another distro on it. im not a fan of xandros in the least, but this "review" was completely redicules, and a total waste of time.

A couple of considerations
by Anonymous Penguin on Sun 20th Mar 2005 21:22 UTC

1)Xandros: I edited the sources.list, I run a dist-upgrade to Sarge and I didn't break anything.

2)Linux not ready for the desktop? I have enough of it. For me it has been ready since SUSE 9.0 (wonderful release) For Jo User it could be ready now (e.g. Linspire 5.0) or at the latest in 12/18 month time.
After all, many Jo Users still run Windows 98

Reviews and Rants
by Bob on Sun 20th Mar 2005 22:47 UTC

The review is the man's opinion. It's not fact and its not fantasy. So ease up on him. In terms of it being a duplicate to another Xandros review a short while back...so what? It's nice to have different perspectives of the major distros. Negative remarks should be weighed objectively. Not scorned with vitriolic responses.

Xandros is an excellent example of Linux state-of-the-art. We can agree on that.

He's right
by Eric on Sun 20th Mar 2005 22:55 UTC

Linux is just a kernel.

With a billion operating systems derived from it.

It was born for hackers and will only be used by hackers.

I like it.

Alot don't .

Wait for Haiku or use yellowtab,skyos and mac osx.

Setup shmetup!
by Mr Contraire on Sun 20th Mar 2005 22:55 UTC

Ok, so here's a thing. There's been some discussion on here recently about old laptops and using Linux to re-breathe life into them. I like many others involved in the discussion have enjoyed playing devil's advocate a little, so I installed a couple of different distributions onto my girlfriend's old laptop, firstly because I was curious to see her reaction to this new and strange environment, and secondly because I was curious as to how KDE/Gnome/Flux run on this older hardware (old 466 Celeron Thinkpad).

My story goes like this :

At the behest of "she who knows best" I wiped the old windows 98 which was rife with spyware and trojans (despite running norton), sadly "non-technical" people don't manage firewalls and virus scanners particularly well (something Windows zealots tend to gloss over).

Knowing full-well 98 isn't really hip anymore I installed XP, whilst "she who demands" made approval grunts ;-) XP failed to detect the correct video or sound for the laptop, or the cable modem plugged into the usb. So, the first step was to get the Ambit cable modem working, going through the usual debarcle with installing drivers for it, resetting, next step was to hunt for drivers for XP for the video and audio hardware. After much searching of many dummy sites which link to many other dummy sites, I eventually found and installed the correct drivers. (It seems the words "drivers" and "XP" are a signal to Google to switch to "court-jester" mode).

I installed the drivers and restarted a zillion times, noticed the only pling was sitting on the 56k modem, which I didn't need.....

I download and install Kerio firewall, download and install Norton, dug through a pile of CDs (Nero etc) and installed those, then downloaded upgrades for each one from their respective websites. Resetting a zillion more times.

After all my efforts "she who makes insane demands" decided it was too slow, grrrr, so I gulped (realising I'd just lost three hours of an afternoon) and suggested we try Linux.

First we tried Vector 5.0 Soho, which looked impressive and found most of the hardware. Based on slack, it worked really well, and performed pretty quickly. However, I knew she wouldn't really understand the package system, and I feel part of the fun of Linux is getting more "stuff".

So I tried SimplyMEPIS, I knew Debian was/is easy to manage and stable, so after downloading it and booting off the CD I went through the process of installing it.

One important thing to note with both distributions is that "it" is not just the OS, but everything else too! ...including ALL of the drivers for my hardware, INCLUDING the driver for the cable modem which fired into life immediately. ALSO, all of the open-source equals to the pile of CD's I'd installed on XP, Nero (K3B), Photoshop (Gimp), PowerDVD (Xine), Office (Open Office), etc. Also, the firewall is built-in and the virus scanner (for now) is not necessary.

So, in a very large nutshell, I completely disagree with the jist of this article, I personally found the whole "setup" experience a breeze on Linux and a nightmare on Windows. This was the case on both Vector AND Mepis.

My girlfriend is really happy with Mepis, so it's slightly slower than Vector, but much easier for a newbie, Synaptic makes all the difference - she can't believe the amount of "stuff" you can just go and download, thank you Mepis! :-D

RE:Setup shmetup!
by Anonymous Penguin on Sun 20th Mar 2005 23:59 UTC

Thanks for a good story, it fully proves my point ;)

RE: lol, what a moron.
by alwin on Mon 21st Mar 2005 00:07 UTC

> I think he didn't do an apt-get update after adding the apt source.
> No wonder it didn't work, what a total fucktard.

well, you could blame him, but you can also blame apt for this. why doesn't apt automaticly update when it sees a source is added? this are the small details linux needs. most likely those features will never be added since most developers say a systems should not do things on it's own. which is good for the experienced user, but really annoying for the novice user.

Well, actually...
by Anonymous Penguin on Mon 21st Mar 2005 00:16 UTC

"why doesn't apt automaticly update when it sees a source is added? this are the small details linux needs."

If you use synaptic and change the sources.list from there, it will warn you that an update is needed.

RE: Pathtic
by Andrewg on Mon 21st Mar 2005 11:53 UTC

Just to point out you can use WindowsXP to burn CD's without any 3rd party programs. Infact Easy CD Creator is a pain. Much rather use the built in CD Burning. Nero is nice though

RE: Xandros Networks
by Fizzol on Mon 21st Mar 2005 14:34 UTC

>well, you could blame him, but you can also blame apt for this. why doesn't apt automaticly update when it sees a source is added? this are the small details linux needs

The supposedly "appalling" Xandros Networks does in-fact automatically update anytime you change its apt sources.

fruitless semi-journalism
by Anonymous on Tue 22nd Mar 2005 03:40 UTC

<...and I feel part of the fun of Linux is getting more "stuff". >
You nailed the point!!!
Once I learned that ( actually got sick of abundance of available packages ) I embraced Xandros Desktop 2.5 Buseness Edition. Its conservative (non-hackers) approach is just what is the main foundation of Xandros ( business ) philosophy:
deploy only what really works - stay away from bleeding edge releases. As a result you'll get less customer calls for phone support and troubleshooting. It gives the very predictable matrix and less deviations. It provides reliability ,stability and accountability.
Xandros download version shouldn't exist at all. Crippled to the point where user cannot get even slightest idea what the full-blowned version really is is just counterproductive. Period!
The problem here arise from the fact that certain semi-journalist, semi-IT-person had an opportunity to publish something which was supposed to have influence /impact to broader audience. Fortunately even India prime-minister is more knowledgeable Linux guy than that remote comentator and he wouldn't install scale-down versions Linux no matter who is a distributor. And India is among countries who are about to deploy FOSS on a large scale.
Besides that I can imagine semi-journalist's lab ( he downloaded his copy over dial-up; what a masochism). He does not even have two computers at his desk so he can compare features side-by-side.
Link to the article puvblished here at OSnews.com is just the sign of declining criteria and/or bad taste.
And, yes, Linux is desktop ready to me since Mandrake 7.2