Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 12th Dec 2006 00:14 UTC, submitted by Valour
Permalink for comment 191182
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
While replacing your whole Windows structure with Xandros is a cool thought, it's not practical in a lot of instances. I work for a large organization that has Windows Active Directory servers running our security and file sharing. While the organization itself wasn't about to switch gears, they were happy to let me install Xandros on my workstation. I have to say that the Windows integration was phenominally good. By far the easiest setup I've ever done (that includes Ubuntu, RedHat WS, Suse, and Fedora) and that was on version 3 which is almost 3 years old.
If you're looking for a workhorse OS, Xandros is a great choice. If you're looking to tinker or have a need for bleeding edge software, then Xandros may not be for you. That's the beauty of Linux, you can choose the distro that fits your needs.