Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 18th Jan 2004 08:19 UTC
Oracle and SUN Some of the more experienced among the readers can surely configure CUPS with Samba by editing configuration files with closed eyes. This kind of exercise is useful and fun the first few times, but it can quickly become a mundane task if it has to repeated often. Wouldn't it be nice if we had a distribution that could do it near-automatically? In other words, wouldn't it be nice if we just used Xandros? And despite our natural resistance to use GUI for any kind of configuration, could we still love Xandros? Robert Storey investigates.
Order by: Score:
Xandros
by Alex on Sun 18th Jan 2004 08:33 UTC

From all the Linux distributions I tried, Xandros is the closest to bringing Linux on the desktop.

Finally somebody gets it, right out of the box everything is configured, all the plugins ar eworking and all the menu entries have icons. This distro is about polish.

"This distro is about polish."
by Andrew D on Sun 18th Jan 2004 08:35 UTC

And you can never have enough of that, especially if you're wanting to crack the desktop market.

There is a "liveCD" type thing coming out for it soon isn't there for v2? I fancy having a looksee.

Xandros
by lunxer on Sun 18th Jan 2004 09:14 UTC

I tried out Xandros v2 yeasterday, and i have to say im impressed!
I'm used to install > fix stuff > use it, while here it was install > use it, pretty much sums it up ;)

I misread the title...
by Michael Leuty on Sun 18th Jan 2004 10:27 UTC

Seeing that the posting was "By Eugenia" I'm afraid I misread the title as "Can a Greek love Xandros?"

I've now adjusted my glasses, but can I ask whether the name "Xandros" means anything in Greek (either ancient or modern), or is it a neologos? :-)

GUI's are what the whole idea of desktops is about
by Anonymous on Sun 18th Jan 2004 10:30 UTC

One area where desktop Linux distros could improve is print configuration gui's. In MS Windows one can preview and configure duplex printing, print quality, etc. very easily in almost any application. But maybe Xandros has something similar?

I also like Firestarter quite a lot - if only FreeBSD had similar gui for configuring a basic firewall. It's strange that many distros default to kernel where netfilter is disabled and you have to compile kernel in order to get Firestarter working.

Also, I find that the writer of this article has somewhat narrow conception of the term 'geek'. You don't have to be a source code hacker to be a geek. There are many times more MS Windows geeks out there than there are Linux geeks. Geeks definitely like gui's.

RE: Can a Geek Love Xandros?
by Rodney McDonell on Sun 18th Jan 2004 10:51 UTC

Yes, of course he/she could, but whats the point when he/she already loves debian? ;)

uhm
by rain on Sun 18th Jan 2004 11:24 UTC

geeks usually complain when simplicity and freedom has been taken away from them. xandros offers pretty much the same freedom as any other linux distro. the terminal is still there, the shellscripts still run, you can swap the parts of the system, it's just that the desktop is a bit easier to use.
there's a difference between assuming that a user is stupid and assuming that user wants things done easily.

if geeks don't want an easy to use system then why are most BeOS users geeks?

Mdk9.0
by Anonymous on Sun 18th Jan 2004 11:51 UTC

Not wanting to troll or anything, but I'm using Mandrake 9.0, and it's okay. I attached a printer a few months ago, and everything from the print manager (whatever that is), the printer drivers and all else was configured using the GUI. I can honestly say that I've never used the command line for anything to do with the printer.

I guess I was confused by the article introduction which seemed to say that every user of Linux will *have* to resort to a terminal to get anything done. I just haven't found that.

I'm a little confused as to why easy configuration of Samba and CUPS is used as an example of Xandros's ease-of-use in the article synopsis when the reviewer doesn't mention it at all AFAICS. The nearest thing I could find is:

"At some point in the process, there were a few mundane questions about the root and user passwords, setting up a printer and such, but there is no reason to go into all that. A veteran of previous Linux installs should find the whole procedure boring at worst."

In fact, the last sentence of the above seems to suggest that Xandros is no better than other distros in this regard.

Setting up samba itself in stock Debian requires about 10 seconds of editing the default config file, and then one can add a samba printer via the CUPS web interface.

I'm also confused as to why, when "the Debian server [was] down for several weeks" the reviewer didn't just switch to a different mirror.

Good Review, Good User Distribution
by enloop on Sun 18th Jan 2004 12:19 UTC

Good piece. My own experience supports it.

I installed Xandros Desktop on my home desktop a few weeks ago, coming from several years of using several Linux flavors on that desktop. Now, I've run enough servers, written enough code, and compiled enough stuff to know my way around. But, at home, I don't need to run servers, I've got better things to do than write code, and compiling someone else's code is just getting boring. Frankly, my home machine spends most of its time dealing with the web and email, just like 99 percent of all those other home desktop machines. Why install servers if I simply turn them off? Why install a truckload of development tools I won't use?

After trying the "Custom" install (worked fine) I went back and re-installed with the "Express" option. It, too, worked as advertised. All my hardware was detected correctly, including my printer (a first for me in Linux).

Windows users won't be thrown by anything they see on the screen. Neither will KDE or Gnome users. Display fonts are clear and crisp, as good as the best I've seen in a Linux distribution.

Like the reviewer, I noticed that the 2nd CD was not involved in the installation. However, when I inserted it and tweaked the sources for Xandros Network appropriately, the packages on the CD were listed by Xandros Network. This confusion could be resolved with a few lines of clear explanation in the manual and the "Quick Start" guide. (If you have a broadband connection, however, you might as well just download the most current packages from Xandros.)

I believe Firestarter was a late addition, which may account for its configuration not being integrated with the initial installation. Frankly, firewall configuration, even of Firestarter, requires too much knowledge to fit into the Xandros express install paradigm. A simple configuration tool needs to be included in the "first boot" routine, wherein hardware and the network are configured.

A GUI exists to enable/disable services, but I've seen no obvious way to use it to add something (like Firestarter) that you want to run at boot. The Xandros discussion board hosts several discussions outlining various ways to get KDE to launch Firestart when it launches, but, obviously, that's the wrong way to go. With a bit of sleuthing with an editor, a person with Linux smarts can tweak services manually, but that's not what Xandros is about.

Mozilla is the default browser. I'd like to see Xandros add Epiphany to their list of available apps.

If you know your way around Linux and want to do all the sterotypical geek things, Xandros won't offer you much of an advantage over other distributions. However, if you want to do all the sterotypical user things, Xandros does them better than any other distribution I've used.

RE: Can a Geek love Xandros ?
by Alex on Sun 18th Jan 2004 12:37 UTC

Nice to see a reviewer looking at things from a different perspective.
I like Xandros overall idea of an easy to use Desktop, although I use/prefer SuSE at the moment.
I am really waiting for a distro to have KDE 3.2 + Kernel 2.6 + Reiser 4. (non-beta versions).

I believe that this will be my switching point to exclusively use Linux instead of XP for my personal/home use. (I still need XP because of my professional activities).
the 3 components I am considering are not the only ones to make my turning point, but they somehow represent (at least to me) the point in time where I will have difficulty finding excuses to stay using XP. (Office XP is also one blocking factor that I am trying to remove).

i must say that SUSE 9.0 has been very good so far
by Kaiser SUSE on Sun 18th Jan 2004 12:58 UTC

I recently installed the Kaiser SUSE 9.0 on a HP consumer laptop and I've been incredibly happy with it.

The autodetects all worked, both KDE and GNOME work, sound works, etc... It even got the trackpad going with a good driver... the vertical scroll region is sweet.

This is the same machine that Fedora Core 1 choked on... FC1 would just lock up during the install.

I have not tried Xandros 2.0 yet, but it would have to be demonstrably better than SUSE for me to switch.

SUSE is great because of all the apps support... and the LSB certification... and because Hans Reiser uses it, there is better chance it will work with Reiser4... :-)

All in all, SUSE really made my weekend so far. It's the best installing distro I have ever used. Kudos, Kaiser.

To much trouble / Not enough options
by Tom on Sun 18th Jan 2004 14:03 UTC

I am currently running RH9 and have been using RH since 1999. I'm not a geek (wish I was) but over the years I have learned enough to install most packages that I've needed like (current Java Environment, MPlayer, and MP3 player w/juke box, Firebird, ... And I've always managed to get my printer and sound configured.

Now I read that Xandros might make me go thru this learning curve again if I am not satisfied with what they give meby default.

I think I will wait for Fedora-2.6 and if I must learn more to configure it at least I will be building upon what I have already learned.

Re: learning curve?
by Anonymous on Sun 18th Jan 2004 14:13 UTC

>Now I read that Xandros might make me go thru this learning curve again if I am not satisfied with what they give meby default.

There is no "learning curve" to setting up a printer under Xandros, unless you count learning how to point and click your mouse.

re: To much trouble / Not enough options
by enloop on Sun 18th Jan 2004 15:07 UTC

If you're happy with RedHat, there's no reason to switch. You will likely find Fedora a very familiar place.

That said, I found a need for less post-installation tweaking in Xandros than I have in RH9, Fedora, SUSE 9, Slackware 9.1, and Mandrake 9.2. In fact, I didn't need to do any post-install tweaking to get Xandros to perform as advertised.

Remember, Xandros is after the same market that uses Windows. No need there to edit scripts after the installation. The absence of "tweaking ability" is a positive factor in this market.

If you want easy SMB/CIFS Try MS Windows.
by Trollboy on Sun 18th Jan 2004 15:12 UTC

Microsofts software is much easyer to set up the Xandros. Much better hardware support. Much better performance. Much better games. Much better price (with a PC you can get XP Home for about $30)
Why would you run Xandros? Cause you hate MS? Is that really reason enough? I run Linux on a lot of machines casue I love to be in control of my machines. Pay money to loose that power? All you get with Xandros is an expensive Windows clone with much less software and hard ware support! YAY! Ehhh... NAY!

Xandros!=OpenSource
by IP on Sun 18th Jan 2004 15:26 UTC

"Some of the more experienced among the readers can surely configure CUPS with Samba by editing configuration files with closed eyes. This kind of exercise is useful and fun the first few times, but it can quickly become a mundane task if it has to repeated often."
What is worng with scripts???

"Wouldn't it be nice if we had a distribution that could do it near-automatically? In other words, wouldn't it be nice if we just used Xandros? And despite our natural resistance to use GUI for any kind of configuration, could we still love Xandros?"
NO!!!
DistroWatch:

Xandros - a community player?

The first reviews of the recently released Xandros Desktop 2.0 are in and it is nice to see that the product continues to gather praise. With all its usability enhancements and innovative approach to desktop computing, Xandros Desktop has quite possibly done more than any other Linux company to bring our favourite operating system closer to non-technical users as a viable replacement for Windows. As such, Xandros deserves our admiration.

But product quality aside, there is one dark aspect of the company that is rarely mentioned in reviews: Xandros's involvement -- or lack, thereof -- in the Linux and Open Source Software developer community. It is a well-known fact that Red Hat employs a famous kernel developer, or that SUSE sponsors KDE and ALSA. Even some smaller Linux companies are actively contributing, a good example of which is Lindows.com's sponsorship of Gaim and other Open Source projects. These types of sponsorship deals benefit all of us - one doesn't need to be a Red Hat, SUSE or LindowsOS user to take advantage of the new features in the Linux kernel or the improved cross-platform compatibility in the latest version of the popular instant messenger. But what about Xandros? Besides the general "bug fix contributions" and a few proprietary, undistributable and closed-source applications, what exactly has Xandros done to contribute to the development of Linux and Free Software? Has it sponsored any Open Source project? Has it released any of its own work under GPL? No, as far as we know, it has not.

Given the above, should we, as a community of Linux users, support a company which bases its products on Linux and other Open Source Software without making any solid effort to contribute back? Or should we just accept that Xandros is a business, which needs to make a profit to survive and therefore is not expected to do us any favours? It would be nice if the company was capable of sponsoring third-party projects or willing to release some of its own code for the benefit of the rest of us, but is this a realistic expectation?

RE: If you want easy SMB/CIFS Try MS Windows.
by john on Sun 18th Jan 2004 15:30 UTC

Microsofts software is much easyer to set up the Xandros. Why would you run Xandros?

Maybe it comes with a better grammar and spell check program.

Xandros?
by Kingston on Sun 18th Jan 2004 15:44 UTC

There are a few very good things about it IMO. The automatic configuration of devices is nice, as is the ability to use a GUI for configuration for everyday tasks. I like the command line, but GUIs are often more intuitive.

The fact that everything a "normal" user needs is on one CD is a nice touch that all of the other major commercial Linux distributers need to start doing. Multiple CD installs bother me, and quite a large number of folks that I've talked to.

The only issue that I have with Xandros, and that's a personal preference thing more than anything, is the inclusion of closed source software. XFM is nice, but I like open source programs better. Not that it matters, but as long as the base system is OSS, I can live with it (I'm well aware that it is).

I could see many experienced users loving this distribution, just because of the elimination of repetitive hassles. And like I said, XFM is nice...

Not too bad a distro
by AMD on Sun 18th Jan 2004 16:30 UTC

Having tried a whold bunch of distros over the past three years (I'm your typical 'average' user, btw) I finally thought Debian was the distro for me. But my fiance didn't really like the idea of using command line for running most of the apps. SO I gave Xandros 2.0 a try, and to my surprise, she thinks its even better than windows ;) .

As far as I am concerned, I still am using Debian, and there are no more arguements about me using a spartan OS. Its money well spent

at least xandros tried their best
by tetsuo on Sun 18th Jan 2004 16:36 UTC

if oneday a linux os is goin to be desktop for EVERYONE on earth xandros mostly is the (first)one

RE: Trollboy
by Telemann on Sun 18th Jan 2004 16:59 UTC

"Much better hardware support. Much better performance."

Well, you've already stated that you're a troll but it's interesting that you got the first bit nearly right. Out-the-box, Linux supports far more hardware, but availability of 3rd-party drivers is definitely stronger for Linux. Also consider that Linux supports loads more architectures than just x86 too...

Regarding your second point, that's laughable. I've just installed a modern, up-to-date Linux distro on an old P75 / 32M laptop, and with some tweaking it flies along. That's 2003 Linux. Now show me a 2003 Windows that would even install, let alone run, on such a box.

Even on my main machine, a P3 800 / 320M RAM with Slackware 9.1 and IceWM, it boots quicker, responds faster and is just generally a much, MUCH better performer than Windows XP. The latter is incredibly sluggish on all but the most powerful hardware.

Xandros
by JB on Sun 18th Jan 2004 17:08 UTC

Id definatly recommend this to someone who comes from a windows background. Very fast, excellent h/w detection, clean interface, and fantastic integration.

Xandros v2 is currently my 2nd favorite linux distro, right behind Slackware 9.1

RE:Telemann
by tetsuo on Sun 18th Jan 2004 17:24 UTC

same old 'fact' tells about linux support more hardware/platform(old, no one use mips alpha even ppc...)

speed is no much diff between the 2.
the truth is windows tend to have this latency prob
while linux ui respondsiveness poor maybe bacause of x11 or hardware reason.

face 'IT' pls.

i use linux simply because of the technology itself.
xp is a real fine os ( still the best desktop)
die mac and let linux fight with MS.

Config CUPS with Samba in Red Hat
by Roberto on Sun 18th Jan 2004 18:11 UTC

Well, you use switch-printing-system or somesuch, and it adds the one and only option samba requires (printing=cups, IIRC)

Xandros 2.0 is great!
by chucar on Sun 18th Jan 2004 18:17 UTC

I have tried many of the Linux Distros, Suse 9.0, Xandros 1.1, and Mandrake 9.0. I had some minor "issues" with all of them(nothing is perfect, eh?). I even had to replace my old motherboard(it had problems, too), before I could successfully install Xandros 2.0. Even asked for my money back at one point and Xandros folks said "not a problem". However, Xandros 2.0 installed fine and is working great on my "improved system". I think Ming and the others at Xandros are on a good path for a Linux distribution that really works and has great potential for the future.

@rain
by Nicholas James on Sun 18th Jan 2004 18:21 UTC

there's a difference between assuming that a user is stupid and assuming that user wants things done easily.

Exactly right,

RE: responsiveness
by Telemann on Sun 18th Jan 2004 19:04 UTC

"while linux ui respondsiveness poor maybe bacause of x11 or hardware reason.

face 'IT' pls."


Erm, perhaps your "Linux UI" is unresponsive, but that doesn't make mine. XFree86 is not to blame for the typically slow performance of modern Linux distros; it's GNOME and KDE. Powerful and friendly as they are, they're enormous beasts.

I don't have any such thing as "poor responsiveness", and never have done, because I use IceWM and lightweight apps. Linux with XFree86 can be just as snappy and responsive as BeOS when set up correctly. And way, way faster than WinXP. Again, will WinXP run fine on a P75?

That should answer your question. Linux is fine. X is fine. Remove KDE and GNOME if you want pure speed.

RE: RE:Telemann
by blah on Sun 18th Jan 2004 19:18 UTC

what was the dig at the mac for?

You claim to like the technology, but all you are is a fanboy or a hardware platform. if you were a real OS or computer enthusiast you would not want the Mac to die.

RE: tetsuo
by JB on Sun 18th Jan 2004 19:33 UTC

If you want responsive, you should really check out a light weight windows manager.

Slackware 9.1 + Fluxbox + AMDXP-2200 = Most responsive system ive ever used! ;)

Re: Learning curve, and Telemann/JB
by WorknMan on Sun 18th Jan 2004 19:40 UTC

>Now I read that Xandros might make me go thru this learning curve again if I am not satisfied with what they give meby default.

The only real learning curve for Xandros includes the following:

1. How to configure fonts in non-KDE apps (Someone would just say 'well, apt-get the gnome control center and there you go' ... well, yeah ... I guess if you know how to do that. That's where the learning part comes in.)
2. Modify the apt-sources in Xandros Networks so you can get current software, and then download from those sources without breaking your existing Xandros packages.

Well, that's about it, assuming that Xandros recognizes all your hardware. If you've got a DVD burner, I don't think that works out of the box.

Telemann
Even on my main machine, a P3 800 / 320M RAM with Slackware 9.1 and IceWM, it boots quicker, responds faster and is just generally a much, MUCH better performer than Windows XP. The latter is incredibly sluggish on all but the most powerful hardware.

After following the directions below, XP runs quite well on a P3-450 (the slowest machine I have):

http://www.monroeworld.com/pchelp/xptweaks.php

Of course, if you run Linux on a castrated window manager that has 1/4 the features of modern DE's, it's going to run faster.

Slow?
by Flatline on Sun 18th Jan 2004 21:32 UTC

It's funny...I keep seeing posts that linux desktop environments are slow. My girlfriend and I went home for xmas and we used my mom's brand-new Dell (which is a P4 2.8GHz machine with 512mb of DDR by the way) and she complained about how slow the machine felt. I run Debian's "testing" branch on a 2.6GHz P4 system and I switch back and forth between about 7 window manager/DE environments (although KDE and Gnome are by far the two most often used) and my girlfriend, who is not by any means extremely computer savvy, has no problems working with the machine.
I know you can tweak XP to make it faster, but my mom doesn't know how to do it and she doesn't want to learn. I have found KDE 3.1.4 to be pretty quick on my machines, and Gnome, while it feels a bit slower, is still pretty snappy.
Note that I am by no means bashing XP...I think that if it is configured properly it can be a servicable OS, and if you like it, then more power to you (as long as you actually paid for it - software piracy just pisses me off). It's just that I keep hearing this "linux DE is slow" stuff and it never really has been for me.

"Did IQ's drop sharply while I was away" -Rippley
by Trollboy on Sun 18th Jan 2004 22:37 UTC

"Not that it matters, but as long as the base system is OSS, I can live with it" <- Here is the problem... Give your cash to diods like Xandros and there will _be_ no community left.
Is everyone running Linux (and the same distro) a good thing? I, for one, don't thing so. The more the better, Linux don't need the "Desktop"! Why, cause Linux is free. Linux needs nothing but coders. The only reason for Linux to be used on a computer is that the machine owner wants too! If noone want to use it and more, fine! RIP!
I dont care what other people use (as long as they like it). I just don't want people like MS and Xandros to lock me out from protocols and fileformats.

re: Xandros!=OpenSource
by enloop on Sun 18th Jan 2004 23:13 UTC

You ask: What's wrong with scripts?

Nothing is wrong with scripts. But, correct use of configuration scripts requires, at a minimum, (1) an ability to use a text editor; (2) knowledge of which script to edit and its location; (3) knowledge of the shell or scripting language in which the script is written; (4) enough knowledge of the tool begin scripted to correctly edit the script.

It is not logical to expect a typical user who simply wishes to place his Xandros machine on a Windows network, or to use a Windows machine as a file or print server, to have any motivation to go through the rather extensive learning process necessary to meet those requirements. From this user's point of view, computers (meaning: developers) are supposed to make that kind of thing easy to do. If an OS fails to meet his requirements, he will most likely stay with the one that does: Windows.

(In the case of someone like myself, who knows full well how to configure machines with scripts, I don't want to these days. Configuring something like Samba my hand is about as interesting as mowing the lawn. If I'm not being paid to do it, I'm not gonna do it.)

Your assertions about Xandros' alleged failure to "give back" to the open source community (apparently based on your unquestioning acceptance of the unsourced and emotional Distrowatch piece you site) have been challenged and contradicted elsewhere. Besides, the GPL does not require Xandros to follow anyone's example of putting kernel coders on the payroll.

@trollboy
by enloop on Sun 18th Jan 2004 23:24 UTC

>>"Linux needs nothing but coders."

That's a silly statement. It's also arrogant and presumptious. But I'm sure if we all follow that dictum, Linux will rollback 10 years in no time.

RE: Trollboy (IP: ---.swipnet.se) - Posted on 2004-01-18 22:37:37
by Anonymous on Mon 19th Jan 2004 00:15 UTC

Dolt. I repeat:

"The only issue that I have with Xandros, and that's a personal preference thing more than anything, is the inclusion of closed source software."

You must have missed that line eh?

Twits like you are the problem. In this world no one solution or way of life will ever suit everybody, that's why there's variety. I don't like lockout either, but their (IMM) twisted way of doing things is as legitimate as mine or (ugh) even yours.

Trust me when I say you'd sound better quiet...

RE: Slow?
by Telemann on Mon 19th Jan 2004 01:09 UTC

"It's funny...I keep seeing posts that linux desktop environments are slow. My girlfriend and I went home for xmas and we used my mom's brand-new Dell (which is a P4 2.8GHz machine with 512mb of DDR by the way)"

Exactly -- the vast, VAST majority of the world's computers in use are less than half that spec. Millions upon millions of computers in businesses and homes are nowhere near that; GNOME and KDE may run OK on your box, but that's not representative of the real world. If we're advocating Linux as a fast and lightweight alternative to Windows, we need to make it so.

The other issue is comparative performance. Even on a machine like yours, the jump from GNOME/KDE to IceWM/WMaker/Fluxbox will be very much noticable. And it's comparative to the past as well. I've used GNOME on a 3 GHz system, and it's about as responsive as a 7 MHz Amiga. Seriously. Yes, the GNOME/Linux box is doing a lot more, but several thousand times more? Not likely. And yet the machine is several thousand times more powerful, taking into account memory, CPU speed, hard disk speed, and so forth.

The current goal of GNOME and KDE developers appears to be: "As long as we're a bit faster than Windows, that's alright". But it's not. It just means people get stuck on the old upgrade treadmill; current GNOME and KDE releases require at least 128M to run smoothly, which makes many machines sold a few years ago redundant. The whole point of Linux in business was to provide a competitive upgrade path for older machines, but if they can't run a modern Linux desktop acceptably then we've not done a good job.

The best thing I can say is this: go and install QNX, BeOS or a similar OS. They absolutely fly along, and yet they do just about everything a modern Linux can do (and often more). I love Linux dearly, and I couldn't be happier with my IceWM/Firebird/Pine/AbiWord setup, but the mainstream distro vendors are pushing GNOME and KDE, and giving people the impression that Linux is slow and unusable on older hardware.

Just a discussion point.

Users? Why? Oh... forgot, testing! :-)
by Trollboy on Mon 19th Jan 2004 01:56 UTC

"Dolt", "eh?", "Twit", "you are the problem" and "(ugh) even yours. Trust me when I say you'd sound better quiet..."

Now there are some strong argument! Are you from MIT? ;-)

Saying that Linux needs nothing but coders are not arrogant, presumptious or silly. There is a big difference between "Linux" and "Linux users". The Linux 'end user' needs other users. But the Linux coder needs other coders. The people who sell Linux to people who want to save a buck needs the people who wants to save the buck. But does the OS need them? Does the end user drive the system forward? Why is the usefull software free and the "helper" software so pricy?

- "Make a system any idiot can use and only an idiot will want to use it."

Can a Geek love Xandros ?
by antixandros on Mon 19th Jan 2004 02:04 UTC

Xandros promissed a free trail download. How can nobody's talking about this? Don't you all see that Linux distrinbution makers are stating to display microsoft practices? If you pay a membership to mandrake or you pay to suse each year or other commercial distribution you'll end up paying as much as you would for for XP. Then most of us who graduated from a university could get xp for free. Nothing beats free, and, excuse me, saving your time. I am not defending microsoft here, I am rather accucing linux distributions. At least Mandrake has a free distribution you can download and SUSE Pro you can get from ebay for 10$. Can anyone tell me why would I pay more than that for a linux distro when is clear to me that there is no way on Earth will do all that XP does and many things on my laptop won't work, and TV out won't work and many other things such as power management. If i configure windows right there is no security problem as there is isn't for most regular users. It's all a hype abouy linux which i've tried to use for 5 years now. It's never been closer to be a desktop replacement as it is now. however, it's still years behind windows or Mac OS X. And until it will ALL work out of the box without a hitch don't eaven think about calling it a desktop replacement. And about Xandros, well, they should keep their promisses first. They take all from the community and give nothing back. I won't pay a dime until I try it. I have the feeling it won't do more than suse 9, and that is the closest to the perfection of linux today.
It is also very important for all linux distros to have a compatibility layer with windows since most people use some specialized software that can't be replaced. For example I need chemdraw, masslynx, can u replace those? NO. Then, linux is just a toy for geeks and most distributors don't make any effort to not only make it usable but a total replacement of windows. If i switch to linux i don'tw ant to dual boot and go back to windows to do my daily chores. Most things I need, linux can't do and it never will since those companies who make the software i need don't make a linux version.

RE: Trollboy (IP: ---.swipnet.se) - Posted on 2004-01-19 01:56:17
by Anonymous on Mon 19th Jan 2004 02:18 UTC

"Saying that Linux needs nothing but coders are not arrogant, presumptious or silly. There is a big difference between "Linux" and "Linux users"."

Where the hell did I either say or endorse that you retard?

Sharpest tool in the shed!
by Trollboy on Mon 19th Jan 2004 02:55 UTC

"retard"... *sigh*
Since you post as 'Anonymous' I cant really be sure who you are, therefor its hard to know what you said or endorsed.
The point with these forums are to have an argument to better yourself and others, not to fight to be the "winner". Get a cup of joe and cool down.

v RE: Trollboy (IP: ---.swipnet.se) - Posted on 2004-01-19 03:04:09
by Anonymous on Mon 19th Jan 2004 03:15 UTC
re: antixandros
by Devilotx on Mon 19th Jan 2004 03:56 UTC

The Xandros 2.0 demo eval will come when the Demand on the servers for Iso downloads for paying customers slows..

RE: Trollboy (IP: ---.swipnet.se) - Posted on 2004-01-19 03:04:09
by Anonymous on Mon 19th Jan 2004 22:24 UTC

Too true! It's nice to have a face to go along with the Trollbly name as well!

Why acquire one of the leading GUI-based/ user-friendly/ hand-holding distros, only to attempt to dismember it - would'nt that be like attempting to run MacOS_X or Windows and then try to decapitate it.
-> That's their claim-to-fame. Rip it out - they become plain-jane distros (I won't name any to avoid severe flaming ;-).
Xandros makes no secret that the underpinnings is Debian.
Install that one and muck around with it, that's why it's still around - for people that like to fiddle.

Like some other reviewer said (and I agree) : I get enough action playing around with several server-oriented distros - there are times I just want to get home, pop my mail, surf the web, listen to/view/whatever some attachment received, or play a CD while composing a letter to Auntie Ellen ... and don't really want to show my technical prowess.

I just want the bloody thing to work !!

In this respect Xandros 1.x/2.0 more than fits the bill. Thanks guys for your hard work and resulting excellant distro.

LB.