Linked by Adam S on Tue 20th May 2003 18:32 UTC
Linspire With today's "Michael's Minute" comes the first official announcement of LindowsOS version 4.0. This humorous take does not include details about the OS improvements, but does seem consistent with their strategy of targetting Windows users looking to make the switch by promoting programs like gaim, Evolution, and Mozilla, which are very similar to their Windows-based competition.
Order by: Score:
Reasons LindowsOS 4.0 will beat XP....
by ThanatosNL on Tue 20th May 2003 18:57 UTC

He lists 10 reasons LindowsOS 4.0 will be better than Windows XP. My favorite is #9

#9 Have more time to play games like Orbz!

And a close second is #8.

[i]Lindows.com provides you with the world's most affordable software and LindowsOS is available for just $49.95.[i]

That's laughable. Not that LindowsOS is a bad product mind you (I've never used it); my OS is free ;)

Better than XP!
by will on Tue 20th May 2003 18:58 UTC

Man - that man knows marketing! LOL.. Seriously, I am looking forward to read the reviews of this version. I might even try it myself.

Better than Windows XP!
by wiggly-wiggly on Tue 20th May 2003 19:10 UTC

Sure XP isn't perfect, but "best PC operating system"? hardly...

Having a chunky GUI doesn't mean your better than XP.

*Yawn*
by dmusicstud on Tue 20th May 2003 19:15 UTC

Thank you Mr. Gat... errr... Robertson, but I'll pass. My best friend is a penguin - and he doesn't charge me anything right now

RE: Better than Windows XP!
by Eugenia on Tue 20th May 2003 19:16 UTC

I agree with this. And here is some proof in the UI inconsistency found on Lindows:
http://img.osnews.com/img/2226/lindows4.jpg (you might need to read the whole review to understand its context though: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=2271 )

Marketing
by Paulo Junqueira on Tue 20th May 2003 19:20 UTC

I agree with _will_,

this man knows how to sell his product. Lindows is a very good effort to make Linux grows up into the home users and offices.

I continue to think that are two important ways that Linux must to be improved: Multimedia and Office applications.

Multimedia: I have a dual boot poor computer and I can see my videos in XP. It´s difficult in Linux... I think the the supported videos needs more memory or resources to be played.

Office: OpenOffice/StarOffice is good, but must to be improved to gain more speed and compatibility. We really need a colaboration solution quickly (Kolab is coming...)

So, I´m a Linux entusiast and I think this man is doing a good job: To his company, to the community and to Linux.

Microsoft doesn´t have the best software, has the best market. Let´s learn the good parts from him.

Re: Yawn
by Paulo Junqueira on Tue 20th May 2003 19:25 UTC

I´m using a "free" distribution of Linux too, but I think the other "free" companies should see Lindows to learn how to make business.

I really want to see Linux in the home computers and offices, not only in servers, and to do this, you must to conquer the users. Microsoft and Lindows knows how to do, and I respect this.

viva la mouse
by Andrew on Tue 20th May 2003 19:28 UTC

Boy-oh-boy I can finally put a stop to the senseless and early demise of my mouse! With all the money I'll save from this feature alone I can quit my job bone up on Orbits and... oh wait that would mean more wear and tear on my mouse …

None of the features that have been mentioned in his statements are things unique to Lindows or as fas I as can tell even had any development work done on by the Lindows folks. Evolution, GAIM and Mozilla are all great tools, but at least Lindows should be giving attribution where attribution is due! Even the fact that Lindows is based on Linux is not mentioned *once* in the entire diatribe. Not giving attribution to the developers of these Open Source tools is surely going to raise many hackles in the Open Source community; a stupid mistake since Lindows relies entirely on that community to build their products.

As for me, Lindows 3.0 is one OS I have tried and quickly removed from my machines. It does stuff that *no* OS should ever do, such as re-writing the MBR record on the hard disk just *booting* to the OS. It managed to mount every partition under the sun and somehow screw with the /etc/fstab files on all my other Linux paritions (no idea how, but it happened after I played with Lindows and it replaced my MBR when I booted into the OS!).

What is worse is that you have to buy a Click'N'Run subscription just to get access to the developer tools! The developer tools should be made freely available either on the CD or from a base level Click'N'Run user account.

So for now Lindows 3.0 has been relegated to a separate hard disk purley for testing purposes only.

So why should anyone buy this ?
by Jeremy Gibbons on Tue 20th May 2003 19:46 UTC

As I examined the points he was trying to make, this is what came to mind :
1)Instant messaging : it looks like Gaim, period. No added value there.
2)No more spam : Hooray if it's done properly (Spam Assassin maybe), but again, nothing really new here
3)Tabbed browsing : how ridiculous can he get ? Anyone with Mozilla/Opera/etc... can do that, even under Windows XP or Lindows 3.0... so what's the big deal ? With the right skin, you can even get a version of IE that does tabbed browsing...
4)Block pop ups : another basic feature of Mozilla, which can easily be done under Windows, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Lindows
5) "More time to watch you favorite TV shows" : unless you intend to spend most of your evenings re-installing your OS, nothing much here (the XP install *is* way longer, but that's not the point)
6)Reduce tech support calls from relatives : if the sample tutorial is any indication, they aren't about to replace the Linux guru, man pages or help forums anytime soon
7)The most preposterous claim : the screenshot shows side-by-side a recent (and beautiful) Mozilla page with nice fonts, etc... and compares that to an IE screenshot from XP with every option turned off : my XP fonts never, ever, looked anything like that...
8)So it's cheap compared to Windows. Might as well go for Mandrake, instead of getting stuck with Click-N-Run...
9) More time to play what ? They expect you to pay twenty dollars for a game that looks like it's at least five years old and taken from a Nintendo ? So sure upgrading the OS is quick, it's hardly something you spend your life doing...
10) I'll take the Libranet approach over this anyday

I just don't understand why Lindows 4 is supposed to be interesting : where is the new stuff, the stuff that could potentially make a Linux user pay for it, or a Windows user throw his XP out ?

re: Kendall Bennett
by will on Tue 20th May 2003 19:47 UTC

I dont't want to seem rude, but i don't think you get it. I'm not going to point it out, but leave it to you. Here is some questions to help you on the way. What is target audience of this OS? What kind of features will this target audience regard as selling points? How should you present a product to this audience to get their attention?

ROFL
by Mike Hearn on Tue 20th May 2003 19:49 UTC

That was a good read. I'd never thought to spin things like that, but some of them are even valid points! Good one Michael!

Respect!
by Tima on Tue 20th May 2003 19:53 UTC

Thanks Eugina, many great news today!

I have been shifting thoughts about the company Lindows.com from "is they bad" or "is they good" for Linux and so on. But have finally made the decision (can't spell that word;) that Lindows is a good thing in a world where operatingsystems without Windows in the name gets a smaller pie of the desktopusers for every year.

Redhat is free and GPL fully to the last, but they arn't going to get the OEM's to put RH9.0 preinstalled on the computers.

Lindows cost 99 USD/year for access to the Warehouse, which got mostly free software but also some commercial quality software like StarOffice/Photogenics/TuxRacer_Deluxe. Hey! The programmers behind Photogenics and TuxRacer_Deluxe gets at least some payment, great! And the people working for Lindows will also get some money if the company can sell their OS. Great too, because then they can code and get paid so that they can feed thier children and pay for living.

I paid my bucks for Windows XP, but before that I have used Linux for 4 years free! (Mandrake & Redhat)
I did pay for Windows XP home edition because I have work and a family to support and can't just sit and try to install 3D-drivers and Movieplayers for hours.

Lindows install the correct Nvidia drivers from start! YEAH, Linux made easy. When I tried Redhat 8.0 Nvidia hadn't released any drivers yet, so I had to go back to WinXP. :-(
And the Warehouse delivers very very easy to install Movieplayers like Mplayer and more.

If you are using Windows today and is considering Linux as a desktop and doesn't want to fiddle around with it to much to get it working, maybe you should try Lindows?

It will be good
by FaithMAX on Tue 20th May 2003 20:11 UTC

I have been using Lindows for about 6 months now. I have used apt-get to install some programs, but have always gone back to CNR. It just makes sense, one click. I have Mandrake 9 on my laptop and it's OK, but I still like Lindows better. I can do afresh install and be up and running in 7 minutes, and another ten I'm running Star-office, photogenics, and many others. Version 3 moved me from XP and version 4 is definately better, as an insider I've used it already.

I wish people would get over the " Linux is free " issue.

RE: So why should anyone buy this ?
by nnooiissee on Tue 20th May 2003 20:19 UTC

It's about defaults. It's about user discoverability. It is about not having someone to install Netscape, turn on popup blocking, and remove all exceptions from the white list for you (like I do for users at my work).

If I were to say that no one needs Knoppix because it is just Debian, this would be recognized as a dumb argument. I use Debian, and I am happy apt-geting ever program I need, and setting everything up to my whims, but that isn't Knoppix's target market, and neither is it Lindows.

I'm a bit suspicious of that Windows XP shot with the horid fonts, but I don't know if that is the default on an XP install. If even one OEM ships a computer set up with that bad of font rendering by default than they are perfectly justified in comparing to that. We aren't talking tweaked settings here, we are talking bare install.

And as to the price of Linux, the old adage of "Linux is only free if your time has no value" comes to mind. While I don't usually agree with that, for Lindows target market setup time will aproach infinite, so it is true.

RE: Dirty trick alert!
by Eugenia on Tue 20th May 2003 20:21 UTC

> Dirty trick alert!http://info.lindows.com/mailers/michaelsminute/compare2.gif

Yes, it is indeed a dirty trick, because the fonts you show on the right hand side ARE NOT Times and Helvetica, as they are in the left hand side. Therefore, this test is USELESS.

RE: Dirty trick alert!
by SteveB on Tue 20th May 2003 20:28 UTC

check it out yourself:
http://info.lindows.com/xp.html
http://info.lindows.com/lindows.html

the html HAS differences! but no matter wich one i am looking at in IE, both of then look terrible. well... not that bad as shown on that image, but still it looks very bad in IE. maybe if i would use cleartype then it would look better?

cheers

SteveB

RE: Dirty trick alert!
by Eugenia on Tue 20th May 2003 20:35 UTC

This is what happens when people can't write their HTML by hand and they need a WYSIWYG editor. This HTML file is FLAWED in regards to this test.

Regarding "Helvetica", they actually use Arial!!! Yes, these are similar fonts but they are NOT the same fonts! They are testing with DIFFERENT fonts. They have this:
<font face="Arial">
And then, for the supposedly Times New Roman test, they just have this: <font size="3"> in the XP html file and ONLY in the lindows html file they have the correct call for the font: <font face="Times New Roman"> (which is later is followed by <font size="1"> and many browsers are buggy enough to reset the FACE attribute in a nested font tag to the default font). Worse, in the screenshot we saw up there, the user didn't even had Times installed, so the right hand picture was NOT rendering a Times font!

In other words, both the screenshot and these two HTML files are FLAWED. The guys who wrote that HTML comparison on lindows, are completely clueless regarding HTML, they even had to use <meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0"> in order to put it together, and even then, the code that was generated was NOT the right one for the needs of this specific test.

RE: RE: Dirty trick alert!
by SteveB on Tue 20th May 2003 20:43 UTC

i think this lindows guy is doing exactly all those dirty tricks you normaly expect or see to come from microsoft.

i personaly find it very amusing to see, how someone has the "balls" to pickup ms way of doing advertisement.

and i don't think that all this "flawed" html code is a misstake.

lindows maybe is not the distro for the ultra-uber linux user, but it has a value and a target market. and i belive this target market is open to that kind of advertisement (somehow they need that abc vs xyz thing).


cheers

SteveB

RE: RE: RE: Dirty trick alert!
by SteveB on Tue 20th May 2003 20:45 UTC

> and i don't think that all this "flawed" html code is a misstake.

i did not mean that the "flawed" html is syntax correct. i just mean, that they did this "flawed" stuff on purpose.

cheers

SteveB

Yeah right
by Darius on Tue 20th May 2003 20:57 UTC

Better than Windows XP? Unless he's got some apps up his sleeve that Linux has never seen before, there ain't no way in hell. The best he can do is make it as easy to use as Windows XP already is. And then you can easily run all these great apps like Mozilla, Firebird, Pan, OpenOffice, Gimp, Gaim, etc. Oh wait ... I can already run these in Windows, so what's the big draw here? To be able to run all of these free apps, some of which I am already using, and some I of which I have passed up in favor of better Windows alternatives?

RE: Yeah right
by SteveB on Tue 20th May 2003 21:18 UTC

> Better than Windows XP? Unless he's got some
> apps up his sleeve that Linux has never seen
> before, there ain't no way in hell. The best
> he can do is make it as easy to use as
> Windows XP already is. And then you can
> easily run all these great apps like Mozilla,
> Firebird, Pan, OpenOffice, Gimp, Gaim, etc.
> Oh wait ... I can already run these in Windows,
> so what's the big draw here? To be able to run
> all of these free apps, some of which I am
> already using, and some I of which I have
> passed up in favor of better Windows alternatives?

you are right, that you can use most of those applications on windows as well. but tell me 1 single reseller wich sells you out of the box that installation?

i would bet that if a reseller would do that, microsoft would nock on his door and he would have hard time to continue to sell that kind of setup.


i think lindows does not target people like you. they target people wich are not that 100% computer experts and like to get a system with manny manny things on it, easy to install and the price schould be cheep.

cheers

SteveB

Robertson's Cheerleading
by Jay on Tue 20th May 2003 21:19 UTC

Darius, this is just the Lindows newsletter - Robertson is just cheerleading.

I agree with will. You people know damn well Lindows isn't aimed at you, yet you waste time and space blabbering about how much better your distros are...and that it's free. I think the vast majority of us are aware of this and it ends up making you look foolish, pretending you don't know what Lindows is and what it's about.

KDE based?
by makkus on Tue 20th May 2003 21:26 UTC

>great apps like Mozilla, firebird, Pan, OpenOffice, Gimp, >Gaim, Evolution

For a KDE centric distro it promotes a lot of none KDE stuff.

rude?
by Andrew on Tue 20th May 2003 21:37 UTC

Will - Kendall's post does not appear to be bashing Lindows ability to define its “4-P’s” marketing speak for (Product, Price, Place, and Promotion – if memory serves;). What Kendall’s post does appear to state and I must say I agree, is that if you are going to incorporate someone else’s work as your next big product breakthrough than perhaps you should give credit back to the chaps whom developed the product.

What it appears Lindows has done in this case is to (at least at face value) claim credit for the work of others as their own.

Aiiii....
by Adam Scheinberg on Tue 20th May 2003 21:54 UTC

Techies just don't get LindowsOS. Let me tell you something if you don't already know - it's NOT for you. There are two kinds of people that LindowsOS is aimed at:

1. the person who knows just enough to want to try Linux, but doesn't know where to start
2. the person who doesn't know anything about Windows, and cares only about price

Lindows is GOOD for everyone here. Here's why:

1. They "SELL" Linux. Not sell as in "sell beer," but sell as in "sell pitch." I just made that up. I hope it's clear.
2. They add legitimacy to desktop Linux in the mass market.
3. They employ graphical designers so that the rest of the world thinks Linux is attractive. I'm still mesmerized that some true Linux-ites use Blackbox or WindowMaker, which, in my opinion, are two of the uglier desktops available. (Although for the record, LindowsOS uses KDE/Keramik, which is not my favorite either).
4. They earn press, for which all enterprise Linux ventures, including Red Hat, IBM, and SuSE, should be thankful. Remember, there's no such thing as bad press -- I'm sure you all have opinions about Monica Lewinski, but is there anyone who doesn't know who she is?
5. Unlike some other commercial Linuxes, they cater to experienced developers. Despite the fact that they aren't in the target, MR and crew have left apt-get and the standard Debian underpinnings intact. They've embraced the open source part of Linux - not stolen it from you.
6. They haven't pushed the same product as a server and a workstation, which others have. In my book, an OS should be OPTIMIZED for one purpose. Understanding that, LindowsOS developers have pushed their OS in one direction. That's brave.
7. Lindows.com has balls where others fall short. No one else really pushes competition with Microsoft -- Lindows.com is like David (as in vs. Goliath), they are really pushing for choice and options against the big guy.
8. They don't isolate or exclude you. They take a tremedous amount of shit from people, and they haven't turned on the community that has treated them without mercy. Opinions about Robertson aside, he stood up and spoke at Slashdot, some of the least company-compassionate geeks on the planet:
http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/05/1225249&mode...

If you can't find it in your heart to appreciate Lindows.com, that's fine. But it's not necessary to mangle them at every opportunity. I don't currently use LindowsOS, but I recognize that they fight the good fight. I think we'd all be better off if we agreed that they do much more good than evil.

Aiiii....
by Paulo Junqueira on Tue 20th May 2003 22:03 UTC

That´s it!!!

Umm..
by mario on Tue 20th May 2003 22:06 UTC

No offense, i hope Lindows and Linux in general succeeds on the desktop, but ti isn't fair and MR is completely ignoring all other Linux distributiosn.

For example pretending Lindows inveted many of the features in the programs displayed, such as GAIM's multi tab support. Or saying tehy are the first to use GAIMas their deault IM, YEAH RIGHT, almost every distro uses GAIM default, even KDE distributions like xandros.

SO many lies, i just lost so much respect for this guy, sure he will trick lots of windows, apple users, but he wont trick any linux users with his lies. I haven't seen one feautre mentioned which is new from V3 apart from better documentation, upgraded programs which came from other people.

BTW: Do any distros finally have proper support for hardware RAID, apart from SuSE Both Redhat and mandrake don't seem to detect and configure it correctly.

hardware RAID?
by Adam Scheinberg on Tue 20th May 2003 22:23 UTC

Virtually all distros have support for hardware RAID, but not the ATA RAID you find on motherboards from ASUS, MSI, and EPOX, etc.

If you have an honest-to-goodness RAID card, you shouldn't have a problem. If you have seperate IDE chains for your RAIDed hard drives, Linux is still struggling on that.

Chances are if you are reading this...
by Anonymous on Tue 20th May 2003 22:39 UTC

...you are NOT the target market for Lindows.

Lindows is absolutely the easiest to install and use desktop Linux out there. It's not for geeks, it's for the 95% of the rest of the world who don't know how to configure their email, let alone compile a program.

Kudo's to Lindows for 1) making Linux easy to use, and 2) marketing it in an easy-to-understand way.

Mark

I noticed Lindows is a GAIM supporter...
by Anonymous on Tue 20th May 2003 22:43 UTC

Gaim says so on their web site.

http://gaim.sourceforge.net/

Go Lindows
by Alex (The Original) on Tue 20th May 2003 22:48 UTC

Some of the screenshots have very good looking fonts.

http://info.lindows.com/mailers/michaelsminute/junk.jpg

I hope they will apply the same fonts in Mozilla and I hope Lindows folks succeed. They are doing a great job.

RE: Aiiii.... @ Adam
by Anonymous on Tue 20th May 2003 22:59 UTC

I don't understand. Most people use their computer to work, not look at the pretty desktop. I use Blackbox at home and it makes me more efficient. I couldn't care any less about how it looks.

Why does efficiency confuse you?

Btw...there are plenty of uglier desktops ;) For instance: ratpoison, evilwm, aewm, etc.

Anyway, my point is that looks aren't everything...and sometimes prettiness gets in the way of productivity. How many employees have you seen sit at their windows desktops playing with colors, sounds, backgrounds, etc...it's fine to customize, but it's a waste of time as well.

Stop the backstabbing
by ybouan on Tue 20th May 2003 23:05 UTC

I agree that Lindows is a good thing.

These emails are not made for Linux users. Lindows has never targeted linux users.

They are targeting low level Windows users.

So stop giving them s***.
They are doing good to the community by getting linux on non geek's desktops.
That's why they don't talk about linux or other distros. Their marketing strategy has only two players: Lindows and Microsoft (and maybe OSX).

The fight is brave and they do not need to be backstabbed by the linux community.

That said I have not tried Lindows and don't intend too for my personal use. I might however start recommending it to all the #@$@ people who keep asking me to fix their MS Windows.

One last thing.
(I'm going to get killed for this)
I spend a lot of time reading all the linux news and discussions and I think Whine OS would be more descriptive name than linux when it comes to users.
I'm a linux lover and I think linux could destroy MS a lot faster if all the users quit whinning all the time.
PLEASE TRY TO MAKE ONLY CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS.

re: Aiiiiii
by Andrew on Tue 20th May 2003 23:08 UTC

hmm, Lindows fights the good fight - an interesting thought to say the least, but what really caught my attention was the Monica Lewinski bit ;) and sadly enough also tied this whole thing together for me.

As a result of good press, Monica forever cast a negative tone on Interns everywhere, Bill was forever labeled as an Idiot for getting involved with an Intern and his wife.. well she got elected.

So how does this tie back to Lindows, Linux and the customer? As a result of good press Lindows runs the risk of negatively tainting Linux to the larger audience; the customers who actually do buy it will are likely to be labeled as idiots for paying for a collection of free software and Mr. Robertson will get elected to the board of another start-up.

...
by Anonymous on Tue 20th May 2003 23:08 UTC

Microsoft should respond by trippling their prices and selling all their products to Eugenia and other people, who is stupid enough to buy them. In the mean time, I'll use the cheaper and higher quality alternative - Linux.

ynouan
by mario on Tue 20th May 2003 23:10 UTC

We ar making constructive comments, like giving creditto the proper people or organizations and stopping much of the FUD which was exposed in the altest MM. Lindows, may be able to trick many Windows users with their claims, but it doe snot make it true, however I wouls still rather they used Lindows than Windows.

I like Lindows, I just don't like they're false advertising, sayign tehy are the first in so many things they ar enot such as being the first to icnlude GAIM as the standard IM client.

...
by Anonymous on Tue 20th May 2003 23:16 UTC

A Microsoft user will find Linux too intimidating to use, but a Lindows user would be able to take on Linux.

RE: ...
by SteveB on Tue 20th May 2003 23:29 UTC

> Eugenia and other people, who is stupid enough

your comment about stupidity is acting like a mirror and shows nothing more and nothing less then your own stupidity.

Re: re: Aiiiiii
by Jay on Tue 20th May 2003 23:34 UTC

Andrew, i don't think that would happen in that manner (of course, who knows?). But, to "normal" people with few computer skills, the idea of getting free software by way of Linux is, to them, like taking a spaceship to Neptune to get it. I mean, ordinary users would never engage in the Linux learning curve we have here. They would rather pay for ease of use.

Re: Lindows is not for techies
by Kendall Bennett on Tue 20th May 2003 23:57 UTC

I take offense at saying that Lindows is not for techies. A good Linux distro that is easy to install, configure and use is a useful tool for techies as well as Windows users. My favorite distro believe it or not is actually Xandros, because Xandros is incredibly easy to install, has all the Linux stuff built in and has a fantastic explorer clone that makes an Windows hack like me feel at home.

More important to me though is that I have never heard the Xandros folks gabbing off with press releases and marketing FUD making out like they invented GAIM, Evolution and Mozilla and the cool features that we all love about them. Technie or dumb ass Windows user audience; correct attribution should be given where it is due and it is overdue from the Lindows camp. The way they market their OS is makes it almost seem as if they are trying to hide the fact that their OS is based purely on Open Source software from their end users. That IMHO is just plain wrong. Stand up and be proud of the Linux heritage, don't try to hide it.

Finally, no OS should *EVER* replace the master boot record on a hard disk just by booting into the OS. Dumb ass Windows users have no need for such an lame feature, since once Lindows has replaced the MBR on their Windows box during installation they wouldn't have the first clue about how to restore it again anyway! And power users? We know how we want our system set up and no distro should ever change the MBR once I have set it. I can live with not allowing me to avoid changing it during installation (since I can always put it back), but force it back to the Lindows MBR during the boot process is just plain wrong!

Contra to the rants of a few....
by CooCooCaChoo on Tue 20th May 2003 23:57 UTC

OSS extremists, I like this guys ability to market things in the way that grabs the attention of the non-technical community.

If this guy wants a tip, I suggest that he starts teaming up with the likes of Adobe, Corel, Macromedia, and other software producers and use some of his millions to pay for the porting of applications from Windows to Linux.

The above companies don't really give a toss what their applications run on, they simply want to sell their product and be done with it. If Mike can give them an offer where by their product can get onto Linux without costing them a cent, I see no reason why they wouldn't go ahead.

Linux's main stumbling block to adoption ISN'T usability or anything else. If it was based purely on usability Mac would have a 95% marketshare. What is holding back Linux is the lack of mainstream, popular commercial applications that people run under Windows and expect to be able to purchase and run under Linux.

If you can say to a user that they buy the applications they want and run it on Linux, most would be MORE than happy to use it, infact, I even know Mac users quite happy to use Redhat Linux 9 if they could only get the applications they want.

Re:re:re:
by Andrew on Wed 21st May 2003 00:05 UTC

Jay - you are correct, and I fully support the concept of paying for software if it in fact simplifies/improves my computing experience. I also agree that the typical market for Lindows is the entry-level budget shopper looking for ease of use and the ability to get on line, send emails and play ORBZ... And finally I also agree with an earlier post regarding Lindows being the only company that has been able to generate mass consumer interest in Linux, A sad commentary in my book but true all the same.

I think the real issue here is what constitutes a good Linux desktop. From what I read above it means hide the fact that its Linux, sell it as a low cost entry level solution to would be windows users and through in a web browser. Then market the fact that it cuts down on the wear and tear of your mouse and leaves more time for watching TV.

I just can’t seem to buy into this strategy - so what am I missing here?

RE:...@SteveB
by Aesiamun on Wed 21st May 2003 00:06 UTC

SteveB said: "acting like a mirror and shows nothing more and nothing less then your own stupidity."

It reminds me of an old childhood saying: "I'm rubber and you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you"

Re: Contra to the rants of a few....
by Andrew on Wed 21st May 2003 00:13 UTC

If Mike can give them an offer where by their product can get onto Linux without costing them a cent, I see no reason why they wouldn't go ahead.

Support, Support, Support - do you think that the target audience here would be capable of running those apps with out calling for support about 1/2 million times. Those calls cost money and lots of it.

However, I like the premise of this post, In my book porting these apps would generate a lot of interest for Linux and dramatically change the values proposition of Linux on the desktop (at least for me) – cheers for the great idea! Now if we just solve the support issue...

You have to improve your perception...
by UcedaC on Wed 21st May 2003 00:19 UTC

To mario (IP: ---.client.attbi.com)

>>No offense, i hope Lindows and Linux in general succeeds
>>on the desktop, but ti isn't fair and MR is completely
>>ignoring all other Linux distributiosn.

So you think he should promote RedHat or Debian on his announcements???? Su should he reccommend you to buy another distribution in case you're an angry Geek???

>>For example pretending Lindows inveted many of the
>>features in the programs displayed, such as GAIM's multi
>>tab support.

I did not see where he says he has invented all of those things.

>>Or saying tehy are the first to use GAIMas their deault
>>IM, YEAH RIGHT, almost every distro uses GAIM default, even
>>KDE distributions like xandros.

He states that XP doesn't have all of these features, to explain it simple.

You go to the shop and buy WinXP, you install it and you have no Spam Killer on Outlook Express neither Internet Explorer has Tabbed browsing.

Is he lying???

>>SO many lies, i just lost so much respect for this guy,
>>sure he will trick lots of windows, apple users, but he
>>wont trick any linux users with his lies. I haven't seen
>>one feautre mentioned which is new from V3 apart from
>>better documentation, upgraded programs which came from
>>other people.

For years MS has been including many third party wares on Windows. And they dont made any big deal of advertisement about this fact.

And again I insist, he is not laying, if you buy XP in the shop it is more expensive than Lindows, doesn't come with tab browsing or spam filters, and yes it comes by default with some fonts set to a very small size, and with antialiasing off.

Maybe you are confusing what you are able to do with your Linux distribution, and what Lindows does by default after you install it.

In my opinion: Long life Linux in whatever shape it comes, Linux is freedom of choice, for myself I use Debian at home, and RedHat at work. I'm not going to restrict or not recommend anybody from using Lindows just because it is not promoted in a geek-friendly way.

Eugenia:RE: Dirty trick alert!
by mythought on Wed 21st May 2003 00:51 UTC

>Yes, it is indeed a dirty trick, because the fonts you >show on the right hand side ARE NOT Times and Helvetica, >as they are in the left hand side. Therefore, this test >is USELESS.

Aha, Eugenia is back in business. What about all the dirty tricks MS has been using? Not to mention their USLESS tests.

RE Re: Contra to the rants of a few....
by Anonymous on Wed 21st May 2003 00:51 UTC

Support, Support, Support - do you think that the target audience here would be capable of running those apps with out calling for support about 1/2 million times. Those calls cost money and lots of it.

However, I like the premise of this post, In my book porting these apps would generate a lot of interest for Linux and dramatically change the values proposition of Linux on the desktop (at least for me) ? cheers for the great idea! Now if we just solve the support issue...


Not entirely correct, you're thinking at it from a purely technical side. Mike runs Lindows, he also sells his "ported" versions of the applications, Joe and Jane bloggs see that there is a one stop shop for their operating system and applications giving the illusion that Lindows is like a mega "does every piece of software" organisation, they then feel more secure and buy the software.

As for the number of calls, they would be very low as the software would be tested against the Lindows distribution and labelled on the box, "requires Lindows 4.0 or greater", and thus, Joe and Jane simply checks what version they have.

Support calls are not high in the grand scheme of things and what Lindows need to do is provide support for issues however they should emphasise the fact that they are NOT there as a tutor or "teacher" of their product which many people think support provides. Support provides just that, it doesn't providing tutoring on how to use the product.

Ragging lindows
by dogma on Wed 21st May 2003 01:48 UTC

I think Lindows isn't a bad thing. Their trying to make Linux more accesible to the non tech market. With the Linux community being swamped with distributions as it is, it will be a little more difficult for the newbie to choose. The common question often heard in Linux chatrooms are "Which Linux is better?". With Lindows not necessarily being better but as surely easier then most it's a good place to start. The announcement on the other hand with their benefits is abit dodge ;)

RE: Re: Lindows is not for techies -> Kendall
by AndrewG on Wed 21st May 2003 02:09 UTC

Could not have said it better myself. We should not be thanking anyone for deliberately trying to misrepresent the facts.

P.S. All the fonts used in that XP screenshots has even standard Anti-aliasing swithced off. Anyone who has XP try it, especially on a notebook, go into advanced -> effects, and uncheck the font rendering checkbox.

RE: font website
by Andrew on Wed 21st May 2003 02:31 UTC

If you use XP, turn off font smoothing and look.. It looks exactly like the screenshot.

There ya go. Yeah its pretty dirty.

gtk2 evolution?
by Anonymous on Wed 21st May 2003 02:32 UTC

Is he out of his mind? Why on earth would he package Evolution 2 before the official release???

some more replies ;-)
by CooCooCaChoo on Wed 21st May 2003 02:55 UTC

RE: Anonymous (IP: ---.nas29.somerville1.ma.us.da.qwest.net)

Is he out of his mind? Why on earth would he package Evolution 2 before the official release???

I've just read the article and no-where do I see them set an official release date for Lindows 4.0 or even the mention of Evolution.

As for people wondering when it will be released, I would say later on this year to co-incide with the release of Ximian Desktop 2.0.

As for the future direction of GNOME, if you have a look at all the projects such as GTKGL, pyGTKGL, ATK, and numerous other projects, IMHO 2.8-3.0 will be the big "boom" for users and developers as things really settle down and rather than huge changes we've see so far, there will be more smaller tweaks.

RE Andrew (IP: ---.satx.rr.com)

If you use XP, turn off font smoothing and look.. It looks exactly like the screenshot.

There ya go. Yeah its pretty dirty.


No as dity as Microsoft comparing Windows 2003 against a 3year old kernel, now that IS dirty. If Microsoft want a fair fight, I'd say wait till the first 2.6 distros are released then come back and compare Windows 2003 to Linux.

RE: CooCooCaChoo
by Andrew on Wed 21st May 2003 03:29 UTC

I wasn't really bashing Lindows.. And now that I think about it, Cleartype is off by default with XP. So his font argument is correct. However, because it is so simple to fix, I'm not sure he should have included it.

RE: CooCooCaChoo
by Anonymous on Wed 21st May 2003 03:33 UTC

Cleartype is off by default, but font smoothing is not. FYI.

Re: some more replies ;-)
by Anonymous on Wed 21st May 2003 03:43 UTC

No as dity as Microsoft comparing Windows 2003 against a 3year old kernel, now that IS dirty. If Microsoft want a fair fight, I'd say wait till the first 2.6 distros are released then come back and compare Windows 2003 to Linux.

This is completely wrong. A three year old kernel? Are you ignoring the fact that Redhat 2.1 AS is the CURRENT release? Hm? If their kernel is three years old as you say, perhaps Redhat should consider upgrading. That's not Microsoft's fault. At least not to the rest of the rational world.

And, Windows 2003 is released now. I got a copy in the mail, can you download 2.6 now? Should they delay the release of their product, until Linux Kernel 2.6 is ready for comparisons? I doubt it. And even then, there would be screams of, "Linux 2.6.0 was just released, of course it's not perfect yet" etc, etc.

So, the only thing dirty is how you are distorting the facts, to server your agenda.

RE Anonymous (IP: 67.168.65.---)
by CooCooCaChoo on Wed 21st May 2003 03:48 UTC

If you read the friendly eratta it states that the kernel with AS 2.1 is 2.4.9, however, AS 3.0 which is going to be released soon IIRC has a more up-to-date kernel. When AS 3.0 is release then Microsoft should conduct a comparision then they, if they come out better, can tout that they have compared two newly released operating system rather than comparing a new one with an ancient one.

As for your rude remark regarding me "So, the only thing dirty is how you are distorting the facts, to server your agenda.", I suggest young man that you go back into the cave you crawled out of and stay there for enternity, and yes, that is a long time.

RE Anonymous (IP: 67.168.65.---)
by Anonymous on Wed 21st May 2003 04:02 UTC

Wow you totally missed the point as usual. The comparison was between the two CURRENTLY RELEASED products. See there, I'll put it in capital letters so you don't skim past it. Windows 2003 has been released. AS 3.0 has not, just as the 2.6.x kernel series has not. It's interesting that Redhat AS may be better in the future, but it's not currently, at the release of Windows Advanced Server 2003. And yes, you are distorting the facts. If you can't realize that, then you are in denial. The study compares the two latest server releases from Redhat and Microsoft. Get it? You are complaining because Redhat is selling "an ancient ... operating system." The point is, they shouldn't be selling it, if it has as many deficiencies as you claim.

RE: Anonymous (IP: 67.168.65.---)
by CooCooCaChoo on Wed 21st May 2003 05:00 UTC

You completely missed the point as usual, AGAIN! why don't I see a comparision between United Linux/SuSE Enterprise Server and Windows 2003? the fact that it includes a more up-to-date version of the kernel that actually addresses the issues that made Redhat AS 2.1 perform poorly.

Redhat AS 3.0 release date has ALREADY been set. Again, if Microsoft can only earn browny points off an old release, maybe I should compare Linux 2.4.20 to Windows 2000, which they still sell.

As for defencies, AS 2.1 was competitive when the main competition was Windows 2000, however, Redhat HAS address those issues with the release of AS 3.0.

Btw, if you think you're anonymous by hiding behind such a non-humorous alias, you're not.

RE: Anonymous (IP: 67.168.65.---)
by Coocoo Puffs on Wed 21st May 2003 05:17 UTC

No claims to anonymity, my subnet is right there for all to see. I just don't need a "humorous" name like CooCooCaChoo to describe myself.

My point, that you have yet to address. Verisign tested the two current releases from Microsoft and Redhat. Your response: well, a new one is coming out RSN from Redhat. It's not out! Just as we can't compare Windows 2003 Server to FreeBSD 5.1-release, because it's not available yet.

I'm not saying there are any deficiences in Redhat AS, only referring to what you said (having a three year old kernel). These are all choices Redhat has made. This is the current server package they offer, and sell for $2500. If there is a problem with it, this is an issue with Redhat. Can you recommend a better package to test against? If you could do some benchmarks, I think that would be interesting. And I am referring only to released, production-ready software (ie- not 2.5.x :-). Honestly, I don't have any bias against Linux or unix-like operating systems. I just see that you are missing the point. Its simply incorrect to state that the test is biased because of the software they used (RH AS and '03 AS). Those are the two currrent releases. Yes 2003 AS is a newer release, but that is irrelevant. 2003 is currently ahead in this benchmark. You could make some other claims, like based on the filesystem of choice used in the test, but not on the products used. I hope I am explaining this clearly... (PS - feel free to lead the link in my username)

...
by Anonymous on Wed 21st May 2003 05:29 UTC

Microsoft is going to have to respond with their new advertising slogan: "Join Microsoft and fuck your sister, it's cool". Sadly many Americans are going to buy into this.

RE: Coocoo Puffs (IP: 67.168.65.---)
by CooCooCaChoo on Wed 21st May 2003 05:34 UTC

Well, I am no denying that there are issues with AS, however, I do take exception when a company compares its product against an older version.

I'll ask again, why didn't they compare it against United Linux? its made alot of volumes about how great it is, and it is based on a very new kernel, why didn't Microsoft compare itself against that? why did it choose Redhat? did they conduct tests before and found that Redhat AS was the only one that performed poorly and thus great as a poster boy for the anti-linux compaign?

When you compare, you compare like with like. I don't expect them to get an OS that is released at the same time, however, they should atleast compare it to an OS that has been released with in the last 6months at the very least.

RE: RE: Coocoo Puffs (IP: 67.168.65.---)
by Coocoo Puffs on Wed 21st May 2003 06:01 UTC

When you compare, you compare like with like. I don't expect them to get an OS that is released at the same time, however, they should atleast compare it to an OS that has been released with in the last 6months at the very least.

OK, that is where we can respectfully disagree. I think you should compare to the current competition. It doesn't matter who, what, why, or how long they have been your competition, they are still your current competition. If someone was evaluating server operating systems, there is a good chance they will be looking at these two operating systems. So its reasonable to compare them.

I do not think that Redhat AS is the poster boy for poor Linux performance. It's a very capable server operating sytsem. Please see their own benchmarks: http://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/benchmarks/

And I believe that Microsoft/Verisign chose it because it is the Linux-based server OS that has the most mindshare, and more people would be interested to see. It is currently, the main competitor (imho).

(please also note the text above the subject box.

Re: Anonymous (IP: ---.cg.shawcable.net))

Wow. You're a genius. Perhaps you could be hired as a Slashdot editor. Or maybe you could use your stunning insight to write some broken software.

we are using Lindows in our office
by Bas on Wed 21st May 2003 07:22 UTC


It's great, fast, stable, easy to maintain, intergrates flawless with our network (Apple/Windows/Unix) very user friendly and has tons of good applications like: StarOffice, Evolution and OpenOffice, Phoenix/Mozilla, Antivirus just with a click with the mouse, no hassels with .configure/make/dependencies. I can now let the user install her/his software without having to guide them in consoles etc. We used RedHat and Mandrake before but our users prefer Lindows by far..
This is where Lindows will grow in the office and multimedia industrie. I hope they will survive that long ;)

ps. check www.openlindows.com

The RDF is strong in this one...
by -=Stephenb=- on Wed 21st May 2003 13:03 UTC

I hope Robertson remembers to pay his rent on the Reality Distortion Field generator he has apparently obtained from Steve Jobs.

RE: The RDF is strong in this one...
by Andrew G on Wed 21st May 2003 14:34 UTC

That comment was hilarious. Thanks:)

Unfortunately its true. I think the next thing Robertson will be claiming is that he has single handedly liberated the world from the cruel and evil Lord Sauron. Oops I mean cruel, evil Microsoft.

RE: The RDF is strong in this one...
by CooCooCaChoo on Wed 21st May 2003 14:54 UTC

Well I've heard that FOX wants it back right now so they can boost their ratings. On the other hand, I saw Bill Gates pre-book 2 years in advance for the release of Longhorn. When I saw him leave the shop he appeared to have a skip in his step.

RE: RE: The RDF is strong in this one...
by Andrew G on Wed 21st May 2003 15:10 UTC

Actually I think it is the New York Times that is in desperate search of one. Considering the escape tactics they are trying tp spread regarding a certain Mr. Jayson Blair.

RE: RE Re: Contra to the rants of a few....
by AndrewB on Wed 21st May 2003 15:28 UTC

Support provides just that, it doesn't providing tutoring on how to use the product.

From your mouth to Gods ears - but after a decade of marketing consumer level software I can tell you that in practice this is not the case. Consumers want handholding and are happy to publicly badmouth (equates to very bad press) any product/company that does not provide it. Lindows target market (as described throughout this thread) would have a hard time understanding even the most basic attributes of the products you mentioned - after all for the most part these are industry leading products chalk full of powerful features many of which require a firm grasp of the concepts involved inorder to bring them to life.

Now if your goal is to bring these tools to the larger Linux world then where do I sign up

re: So why should anyone buy this ?
by mike henley on Sat 24th May 2003 00:05 UTC

http://info.lindows.com/mailers/michaelsminute/compare2.gif

this is totally outrageous. this picture shows windows XP with cleartype and font antialiasing turned off. He's not comparing like-for-like, he's comparing lindows with antialiasing turned on against windows xp with antialiasing turned off, if their target audience are those ordinary people who know very little about computers then this company should be sued for misleading advertising.

I run lindows
by Devilotx on Thu 29th May 2003 21:44 UTC

While not as configurable as Some of the other Debian Builds I've tried is still very nice, I would prefer Xandros but KDE 3.1 breaks that file manager.

Oh and I have Lindows 4, and it runs circles around 3.