Linked by David Adams on Tue 4th Jan 2005 17:22 UTC
Original OSNews Interviews OSNews "sat down" with Linspire CEO Michael Robertson for a Q&A about his company's efforts as the banner-carrier for Linux-on-the-desktop. We discussed the upcoming Linux Desktop Summit in San Diego and the perceptions and realities of the obstacles to widespread desktop Linux use. Linspire also extended a special offer to OSNews readers: a free download of Linspire and a 30 day CNR subscription, so put yourself in Granny's shoes (not literally, please) and give it a try. Correction: The free offer expires on January 15.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
@ Anonyomous
by Vincent on Thu 6th Jan 2005 04:59 UTC

"I like laughing at those that are assuming that selling Gnu/Linux in a commercial capacity is easy , even really rich people in business in IT segment have and would fail , even more when its a Debian base ..."

What I find funny is that you feel that you can guide an OS distribution company through economics when you can't even guide yourself through correct spelling and punctuation as referenced here:

"Yes , but whe make the stuf, its our game and where winning. Linspire aint , it would be sad to see them disapear."

In case you were wondering its actually: "but *we* make the *stuff*, its our game and *we're* winning*;* Linspire *isn't*. It would be sad to see them *disappear*."

Now since we've established english probably isn't your strong suit I'll try to explain to you how, "The LSB and FSG you are already agreeing too anyway behing based of Debian ? " is not a question, does not need to end in a question mark, and if you took the time to read your dibble you'd see that its barely english.

First if one tries to actually translate the above into something that is coherent they'd end up with "You are already adhereing to the LSB and FSG by being based of off Debian." This isn't a question - its a follow up fact to your previous non-question that you used as merely a tool to interject your opinion on what you feel Linspire should be doing.

"Let me say this , you like to rewrite my question to fit the answer you whant to give"

Again I feel we are having a language problem, you obviously cannot understand non-internet grammar. If you'd actually read, you'd see I directly quoted your number 9 question and then instead of an answer gave back a question as a response. However the odd part of this is that despite willfully flamming me for supposedly misquoting your question in number 9 you proceeded to answer my question with, "Obviously M.R. dont control what Walmart does and I dont expect him to have any leverage with them either", meaning on some level you actually understood my point - progress!

"this question is no different and you obviously forget what the suposed purpose of this is "

You are right I don't understand the *supposed* purpose of your questions since like I pointed out before - you ask yes/no questions with a stem that consists merely of your personal opinion alone. If you actually cared to learn anything, which is usually the *supposed* purpose of asking a question you might try asking about why things are the way they are; rather than giving your own half-english/half-idiot commentary in which you further butcher the language by ending each statement with a question mark.

In response to your idea as to how Linspire should offer a payment plan:

"lets try this sugestion it cost nothing to find someone to offer a paiement plan on the walmart laptop , that can be offered from the linspire site"

How do you know that the contract with Walmart allows LinSpire to directly discount Walmarts hardware sales? What makes you feel that even if Linspire could offer a payment plan for its software (which if you've read their site there is a payment plan for CNR) that their contract with Walmart would allow for it to affect OEM licensed installations?

"but the question is simple in itself so I will take your little hand and try and I say try, to explain it to poor little you."

That is the problem. The question even when you do find the patience and metal coherence to phrase it correctly is not simple. Nor have you bothered to ask the right questions or to think your way through your ideas which you've then passed off here as "obvious solutions".