Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 20th Sep 2002 02:15 UTC
Mandriva, Mandrake, Lycoris A few months ago we wrote a full review of the Lycoris Desktop/LX operating system, but many releases happened since then and some things have changed. The Lycoris folks sent us the latest official version (+ online patches), we tested it, and here is what we think about it.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by rajan r on Fri 20th Sep 2002 07:32 UTC

Anonymous: i havnt read a single bad review of any redhat based distribution ever... i wonder if we'll see one with their "desktop" release.

You obviously haven't read the reviews on KDE's mailing list. But as an ex-Null user, I would say the only thing wrong with Null is many KDE apps can't work (except those bundled with RH) and also there is no proper PPPoE config client, CLI or GUI, forcing me to download one and it is quite an inconvience compared to Mandrake or Windows.

Anonymous: Wasnt v7 redhat suppost to be for the desktop? When did it change?

Red Hat never intended for Version 7 to be for the desktop, it was just easier than usual that many reviewers thought so. Many also thought that 7.2 would be for the desktop with the inclusion of GNOME 1.4, but it was dissapointing.

Eugenia: Lycoris is aiming to the Windows home, desktop users.
The new Red Hat aims to the *business* desktop/workstation.

So, there is no point on comparing them, their markets are (still) different.

Except that most people normally use the same OS (same version too) at home as they do in the office, especially those not the geekish kind, or not willing to learn two different UIs and use two different UIs.

But nontheless, I think you got the target markets wrong.
Lycoris: For ultracheap PCs, similar to that from Lindows.
Red Hat: For profit :-)

jbolden1517: 1 - When Microsoft became dominant in PCs operating systems large companies were almost exclusively dumb terminal based for their general employees

Both OS/2 and Microsoft Windows were faster in getting customers from the corporate market than from the consumer market. Yes, before Windows 3.1/NT 3.5 and OS/2 2.0, many companies were using terminal based computers - if they are using computers anyway, but they were switching to OS/2 and Windows much faster than the consumer market.

Why? Many consumers don't have PCs. When people started buying PCs, the growth seems larger because there isn't any other strong players there in the market. While in the corporate market, Microsoft and IBM's OS/2 division were taking market share from terminal based computers.

jbolden1517: 2 - Windows emerged out of the home market and was not a major player in the office market until Win 95, WinNT 3.5; well after the home market had jumped on the Win 3.0/3.1 releases

Windows 3.1 can be considered the first corporate offering by Microsoft alone. It had also developed a version of Office for it. Besides, before Windows 3.1, Microsoft and IBM had been making serious inroads in the corporate market with OS/2. (Windows 3.1 is the starting point of their divorce, BTW).

jbolden1517: AIX and Solaris are another example I know lots of people who run this at work and few who run it at home.

Because these two we originally created for high end workstations, servers and mainframes. I doubt I want to buy an IBM mainframe to check my personal mail when I come home from work. The point being made here is for desktop OS.

Xirzon: X performance is another issue (wait for the zealots to come out of the woods and scream "X is great! X is superior! X is networked!").

I'm not a zealot, but current performance of XFree86 is really good. Most of the blame should go on lack of drivers, as drivers provided by XFree86 isn't really optimized for the hardware.

I once had problems with performance with X, but that for around 2 years ago. Come on, stop critizing XFree86 4.x for 3.x problems.

kyle: Just remember, until the interface and applications are standardized across the OS, Linux on the desktop doesn't stand a chance.

Oh boy. I didn't KNOW that. Hehe. People would judgde Linux by the distributions and it is up to the distribution to choose an desktop and push it to the maximum. Free Desktop standards is really helping bring the GNOME and KDE worlds together. Probably one day with KDE 5 and GNOME 4 (based on .NET, hehehe, kidding) would have each other applications look completely native in both GNOME and KDE. Who knows?

Besides, I would move to another OS if a choice for what desktop I want is taken away from me. I don't think that normal consumers should be overwhelm by forcing them to choose, but I think it is an right decision to allow them to choose if they want to. (like Red Hat's approach).

Jay: It attracts the eye in a good, pleasing sense. And not with eye candy, in the true sense of the term, either, but by the overall look itself.

I wouldn't call it beatiful. Yes, the icons are as nice as those on Windows XP, but the window decoration, the Qt style etc. is so ugly.... and it is still ugly if the font issue is resolve. May be personal preferences, but I rather use RH Null which has a more professional and light look.

Michael: I'm a Windows-only user and I plan to switch to the Mac on my next purchase because of XP's DRM approach. Using XP would be like voluntarily entering a jail cell and closing the door.

And the Microsoft DRM in Windows XP is a teddy bear compared to what their BigBrotherInside OS is going to look like in the future.

Idiots. Running away from Windows because of DRM? It doesn't affect the way you enjoy your media you have. So how does it affect you anyway? You would be able to download, obviously for a fee, DRM media and play it. Don't like the approach? Don't buy DRM media. As if you can buy DRM media on Mac OS anyway. So the switch for Todd is not educated and stupid.

Darius: I got my copy of XP w/SP1 slipstreamed from and as far as I can tell, DRM doesn't exist in my copy ;)

DRM is for media control. What you are speaking about is illegally nad immorally stealing ones product, and you aren't getting a product without DRM, but without WPA.

Eugenia: Lindows CnR has already 1173 applications over there. Debian and Portage *do* have thousands.

Most of CNR applications in Ultilities are standard KDE apps installed on Lycoris (no need for downloads). Stuff like Language Packs is already loaded on Lycoris' CD, not made available on CNR. And so on. I think the number would drastically lower if Lindows put back the ultilities back into KDE.

Yeah, but IRIS still has little apps, but CNR doesn't have "thousands"

Paul Eggleton: You'd no doubt lose compatibility with all the existing X apps (of which there are now thousands), not to mention losing the very nice ability to do remote desktops

Many of these apps aren't suitable for the desktop *yet*. Plus some of them are made for high end workstation stuff.

Besides, remote displays isn't a feature on X11 could have. Fresco for example has this feature (not saying Fresco is ready to kill X but....).