Linked by Barry Smith on Wed 26th Nov 2003 18:11 UTC
It seems to me that a lot of attention lately in the commercial Linux development area has concentrated on either large enterprise customers, or wooing the home user who can barely turn a computer on. Even distros claiming to offer the perfect solution for both ends of the spectrum don't quite seem to fit what I am looking for.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
After reading the review, I had a good impression of Lindows, especially the support. But with the author's bizarre scoring system, they appear to have a negative view.
I noticed a few problems with the review. The first major one is he was trying to use a desktop Linux distro without broadband. While in theory, it would be nice for this to work, it is not the reality. It leads to endless frustrations, and at best, an unreliable and painfully slow connection. That is not Lindows' (or Linux's) fault, but the connection's.
The second problem I noticed is that the author wants to use Lindows like any other Linux distro. It wasn't designed for that. You can't expect apt-get to work without breaking things. The whole point of Lindows is to work for those who have never heard of the command-line and think their screensaver and wallpaper are the same thing.
Lastly, why on Earth are you reviewing 4.0, but purchasing 3.0, and trying to upgrade over dialup? Did this save $10 from the purchasing cost? If you're going to bother with a review use the latest version of the operating system. I'm not going to install Windows ME, try to upgrade to XP over dialup, and then go on to claim that Windows sucks because the process didn't work well.
Be reasonable here. Honestly, I thought it was a good review. While I know my post reflects otherwise, I am just trying to point out if the author had broadband, had purchased 4.0, and had not tried to do anything a Level 1 or 2 Joe-User wouldn't do, his experience would have been noticeably better.
After reading the review, I had a good impression of Lindows, especially the support. But with the author's bizarre scoring system, they appear to have a negative view.
I noticed a few problems with the review. The first major one is he was trying to use a desktop Linux distro without broadband. While in theory, it would be nice for this to work, it is not the reality. It leads to endless frustrations, and at best, an unreliable and painfully slow connection. That is not Lindows' (or Linux's) fault, but the connection's.
The second problem I noticed is that the author wants to use Lindows like any other Linux distro. It wasn't designed for that. You can't expect apt-get to work without breaking things. The whole point of Lindows is to work for those who have never heard of the command-line and think their screensaver and wallpaper are the same thing.
Lastly, why on Earth are you reviewing 4.0, but purchasing 3.0, and trying to upgrade over dialup? Did this save $10 from the purchasing cost? If you're going to bother with a review use the latest version of the operating system. I'm not going to install Windows ME, try to upgrade to XP over dialup, and then go on to claim that Windows sucks because the process didn't work well.
Be reasonable here. Honestly, I thought it was a good review. While I know my post reflects otherwise, I am just trying to point out if the author had broadband, had purchased 4.0, and had not tried to do anything a Level 1 or 2 Joe-User wouldn't do, his experience would have been noticeably better.