OSNews

Yes, there is.
I think Keramik looks great, it's actually one of the first things I change from default KDE.

Not just to contradict you but really, I cannot stand Plastik, not in 2006 and probably not even in 2060.

Keramik took a long time to grow on me, but now I think I would be happy with either.

And unless Xandros doesn't provide Plastik, as we all know, You Have The Choice[TM]

I'm with Thom as well. Xandros looks like a good distribution for somebody migrating from Windows - but that look!? .. eek...

What? Their File Manager it is still Konqueror, even if a little bit tweaked.

Actually, that's not true. It's written with the kds libs and uses a few kparts but it's not konqueror. When they acquired Corel Linux, they also got the corel file manager in the deal. This was a custom piece of software that xandros has continued to develop over the years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xandros_File_Manager

Commercial distros can include commercial software and closed-source drivers. It's a short-term convenience: 10 or 12 years ago Linux didn't have LVM; then someone took the (closed-source) HP implementation and built a work-alike.

Edited 2006-10-06 00:51

For me, the main reason I would pay for a Linux distribution is to have more things "work out of the box" and not to have to fiddle around setting up various basic functionality myself.

Sadly, this is not the case with Xandros - you pay a hefty price and still things don't work (e.g. DVD playback, multimedia playback within the browser, etc.) There are hacks to get these things working in Xandros, but if you still have to do this then you may as well just hack around in Freespire or Ubuntu for free.

As also noted in the review, Xandros is badly behind the times in terms of its choice of packages and software, most are not the latest versions and therefore lack much of the functionality that other very stable distros with more up-to-date packages can offer. If you try to update to the latest stuff within Xandros, you seriously risk breaking the many customizations and tweaks Xandros have made (e.g. the Xandros File Manager).

Then there is that whole issue of "product activation", which leaves a nasty taste in the mouth for many.

Given the great strides being made by distros such as SLED and openSuse, Fedora, Mandriva, PCLinuxOS, Freespire, Ubuntu, etc., I don't really see what Xandros has to offer which would justify the high entry fee they charge. Maybe most of the "cost" is covering included commercial software like Crossover Office and Versora, but then it makes more sense to buy independent copies of these which can then be installed on any distro and are not just tied to Xandros.

Not necessarily the case. Kanotix, for instance, has one of the best hardware detections and yet it is free.

Making things work out of the box is generally long tedious work that requires access to a large collection of test hardware. Basically it's the type of work that volenteers working for free can't do as well as companies how can afford to buy lots of different hardware and pay people to do the boring work.

... found out about the Activation, and immediately returned the product for refund.

I really don't get this ... Why would you dismiss a perfectly good product because of activation?

Because he feel it is wrong and refuse to support the companies who implement such features? I think it is nice to see someone put their money where their mouth is for a change, instead of the many who just moan without doing anything.

If everybody who grumble about the Windows XP activation scheme and the WGA scheme actually voted with their wallet instead of simply grumbling, then it is not entirely unlikely that they would have taken it out.

"""I really don't get this ... Why would you dismiss a perfectly good product because of activation?"""

I can understand the sentiment. I used to have to work with software that required activation. In fact, I still do, but not nearly as often.

A significant amount of time (time that my client was paying for) went into activation, registration... and the inevitable *problems* with activating and registering. (When things go wrong, and they do, it can take *hours* to get the problem resolved and the program "activated" so that the customer can start using the thing that they have *ALREADY PAID FOR* and are now paying more for, by the hour, in support time!)

The companies requiring the registration are saying, in a rather explicit fashion, that they care more about the possibility that someone might steal from them than they do about inconveniencing their own customers.

So, while I find the concept of "activation" distasteful, I also have purely practical reasons for disqualifying any product that requires it... *if* I have an alternative.

As it happens, right at this moment I have a client that I set up with software that requires activation. I registered and the activation key was supposed to have been emailed to me two days ago. It wasn't. Time to get on the horn and get the company, which in this case sells accounting software, to cough one up.

I shouldn't be upset, I suppose. It's all billable time...

Edited 2006-10-06 13:35

(When things go wrong, and they do, it can take *hours* to get the problem resolved and the program "activated" so that the customer can start using the thing that they have *ALREADY PAID FOR*

++

I've jumped through the hoops due to a valid XP license failing activation on more than one occasion, with client's computers. But if it had been one of my own computers, then my reaction would have been "Flush 35 minutes down the toilet because of a broken anti-piracy system, or find an Anti-WPA crack... tough call."

and are now paying more for, by the hour, in support time!)

No kidding. I recently gained a small organization as a new client because several of their copies of *a certain popular Anti-Virus suite* kept de-activating themselves (and refusing to re-active, naturally). The response they got? "You're past the end of your free support period. If you want us to attempt to resolve this for you, that will be $35 minimum." They might as well have added "Oh, and would you like the number of our nearest competitor?"

Because I paid for the program and the activation is an insult to me that I refuse to accept. Her machine currently runs Freespire. The only thing they have is an EULA left over from its Lindows roots.

This is really lame. Xandros is commercial software. If you think you're being tracked and refute that, fine. If your beef is with commercial software, you shouldn't have been using WinME. But if you don't like activation in general, then I submit that you're being suspicious -- are you a thief? Why is activation bad?

Either go for free software, or accept that people who sell legal commercial software have a right to protect their product.

There are two facets to this. Firstly, why should people have to "activate" a product they've already paid for? Would you accept Toshiba coming to your house to check whether you're only viewing legally-obtained DVD's on their player you just bought? Or Epson coming to "activate" your printer, or to check that you've not been printing off copies of "Pride and Prejudice"? No? I sure as hell wouldn't.

Secondly, why should customers trust companies who don't trust their customers? It's not as if they're whiter than white. In fact in their quest to "make money" they will do things that are unethical, immoral, and illegal, quite happily, and quite often. Check the recent news stories on Enron, Apple, HP and Microsoft for evidence.

You'd have a point if we were talking Microsoft or Apple; they're HUGE multinationals to whom one more or less legal copy would mean fairly little.

Now, however, we are discussing a small company, one that falls into complete insignificance compared to Microsoft/Apple. Hence, they have every right to defend their probably smal revenue stream. Without this activation thing, it would be extremely easy to pirate Xandros and leech off of the work of others.

In fact, I am happy Xandros is doing whatever it takes to ensure revenue. They owe it to their shareholders as well as to their customers, because no revenue = end of company = you as customer are f--ked.

People should learn that NOT all companies are the same, and that there is more to think about than just yourself.

You'd have a point if we were talking Microsoft or Apple; they're HUGE multinationals to whom one more or less legal copy would mean fairly little.

Sorry, I disagree. There shouldn't be one rule for small companies and one rule for big ones, even if you switch 'em so that unlike now, small companies get the better part of the deal.

Now, however, we are discussing a small company, one that falls into complete insignificance compared to Microsoft/Apple. Hence, they have every right to defend their probably smal revenue stream. Without this activation thing, it would be extremely easy to pirate Xandros and leech off of the work of others.

I have no objection to any company "protecting it's revenue stream". What I object to is what I see as them putting the law into their own hands and going WAY over the top. As a private citizen, if someone steals from you you go to the police; you don't demand the right to sneak onto the property of everyone you know and everyone who lives near you to check whether they've stolen something, without even checking whether something has been stolen.

In fact, I am happy Xandros is doing whatever it takes to ensure revenue. They owe it to their shareholders as well as to their customers, because no revenue = end of company = you as customer are f--ked.

People should learn that NOT all companies are the same, and that there is more to think about than just yourself.

Any company that mistrusts its customers, in the absence of any evidence of wrongdoing, is in my view JUST as bad as MS. They have the right not to trust them, I suppose; but we have the right not to trust those companies, too.

n the absence of any evidence of wrongdoing

So there is no evidence that piracy in the software world exists?

Thom, don't be silly. There is evidence that software piracy exists, and that crime exists. That doesn't mean you or I can legitimately accuse the other of being a software pirate, a thief or a rapist without any evidence that the other has in fact pirated, stolen, or sexually assaulted some{thing,one}.

Thom, don't be silly. There is evidence that software piracy exists, and that crime exists. That doesn't mean you or I can legitimately accuse the other of being a software pirate, a thief or a rapist without any evidence that the other has in fact pirated, stolen, or sexually assaulted some{thing,one}.

So let me get this straight-- by having an activation scheme in its OS... Xandros accuses me of being a pirate? I'm sorry, but that makes no sense.

In The Netherlands, students get subsidised by the state. The amount of this depends on whether I live with my parents, or alone; when I live alone, I get a lot more money from them. The government checks whether I *really* live on my own. Does that mean the government thinks I'm a fraud?

Of course not.

Thom,

In a community this cozy, if you treat your customers right, and show them that you trust them, there is every reason to expect that they will deal straight with you. Possibly even sending a little more money than required.

By requiring activation, Xandros is setting the tone for the relashionship. And it's not a good tone.

I'll admit there is a gamble involved. Xandros is on the conservative, conventional side of the gamble. But, in this case, I suspect it is also on the losing side.

-Steve

I paid completely legitimate US currency for a product, and then activation is required to fully use this product in its intended way. No, I refuse. And I submit that your implication that I am a thief is uncalled for. Either accept that something I paid for should work fully, or I get my money back.

When you buy Tivo, you have to activate it to get the schedules.

When you buy music from iTMS, you have to connect to Apple's servers.

When you get a credit card, you have to call to activate it.

This is life. Activation of commercial software is OK in my book.

I do not own a television. I would not RENT DRM-infected files. A credit card requires activation to ensure that the individual to whom the line of credit is granted is reasonably assumed to have received the card. I am NOT buying a credit card. Indeed, it is life. I refuse to activate software.

Edited 2006-10-07 05:58

"""I do not own a television"""

Glad to meet you!

I have a TV. It's a 27" Magnavox. Once or twice a year there is something compelling enough that comes to my attention that I decide to fire it up.

It's almost like putting up the Christmas Tree. I've got to get it all plugged in, make sure the cable service is working, etc. I usually start a half hour before the scheduled start time of the program.

Come to think of it though, the last time I did this was a year and a half ago, when "Enterprise" did a "Mirror Universe" episode in which the original "USS Defiant" came to life again.

Suffice it to say that I'm not a big TV fan! :-)

osnews-crew@osnews.com.

Odd that activation causes such a stir. You know you have to activate (they call it register) Red Hat and you have to activate Suse as well. This is so that only paying customers get support. I have no issues with it and, after playing with the trial version, will be getting the premium edition soon.

To each their own.

I have SuSE, and I did not need to activate it. What version do you mean?

Oh, I reread. Well, yes, but many people get by without free support, either on Linux or Windows. Besides, you don't have to register everytime you need to add hardware or reinstall the bloody thing.

Edited 2006-10-07 19:58