OSNews reader Dave Merrill was lucky to get access to a preview version of the Lindows OS and inform us with his findings. Read more about Dave’s mini-preview. In the meantime, NewsForge also published a more extensive preview of the Linux-based OS which aims to run Windows software out of the box without the need of a Windows operating system installed. The NewsForge article also includes three screenshots.“Lindows has released their first preview release 0.9 yesterday. The long awaited and much anticipated linux-based system comes in two flavors. One is designed to install inside your existing Windows partition, the second being used as a clean install across a whole drive. I happened to run both installs last night and was pleased for something that clearly was stated as missing pieces of function and being pre-released software (not sure if I’d even call it beta yet). The installation into an existing Windows partition went better than I expected. It was able to successfully migrate a fair portion of Windows settings over to Lindows. In addition, it was able to configure some of my applications to run under Lindows, essentially using WINE, I believe. I say some only because I’m still walking thru all of them to determine what does work and what doesn’t. Microsoft Office2000 has been verified and all applications came up for me. Some of the text on the menus is sized incorrectly but was usable. The only issue I had with this install, in fact, appears to be lack of support for the pcmcia chipset the laptop I’m using has. It wasn’t able to see two known-linux-compatible network cards so I suspect the problem to be pcmcia (but am still working to determine this).
My clean install was a different story. With a spare drive in hand, I installed it in a relatively current model laptop and found all hardware to be supported. Oddly, it looks as though there are only a couple of resolutions supported for my video chipset and not the one that’s native but x came up without missing a beat at 1024X768 (machine is capable of 1400X1024). The networking portion via pcmcia worked out of the box, using the same cards that did not work in my othre laptop. Since this was a clean install, it initially contained only a handful of applications contained in Lindows KDE-based install (though just about every game in the normal linux distros are included). I decided to go for it and try to install via windows install cd’s. To somewhat a suprise to me, Office2000 did successfully install and came up (brief check). I wasn’t so successful with other installs. I tried to install Lotus Notes and Smartsuite without success. Found that most apps that worked in the previous install would not install, including Photoshop, and Dreamweaver.
All in all, I was still encouraged since what worked, seemed to work well, wasn’t overly slow (though that initial start on items it migrated to WINE did take quite awhile as I’ve found to be the case under any Linux/Wine use).”
— Dave Merrill
The scary thing is that people will buy this, and it will most likely be a moderate success… ugh… it’s a gross thought. Some kinda mutated mess borne out of Linux with the features of Windows. It’s like a sick sci-fi movie, perhaps not too far away from ‘The Fly’.
Yes, it’s a sick and twisted idea… but if it gives more people the ability to move away from Microsoft and towards Linux, I’m all for it. I’m also glad to hear that it really works ™ and isn’t just vaporware, as many people were predicting.
I’m really concerned that the user runs as root with no password unless they specifically alter that themselves. If this distribution is successfull, it will make virii on Linux much more common. The ability to create users and assign rights in Linux is there for a good reason. I hope they help advance wine, etc., but I think they may do more harm than good.
>>>>The scary thing is that people will buy this, and it will most likely be a moderate success.
The real scary thing is that people are paying $99 for this preview version.
“but if it gives more people the ability to move away from Microsoft and towards Linux, I’m all for it.”
Yeah, sure …. like I am going to switch to and put up with Linux in order to run the same apps I am currently running under Win2k? *pffffffffft* And who’s going to pay ME to do this ?????
I thought most people used Linux because it wasn’t windows (okay, not most, but you get my point). KDE isn’t the prettiest GUI ever, but if it looks like windows, acts like windows and potentially has the same catastrophic gaping security holes of windows( running as root), just use windows.
could they at least remove the damned 3 pixel border on the bottom of the task bar?
Ok so the user would be buyin a Debian Release (however it is a “new” version xandros) with a wine layer running KDE and a nice install….. oh yea and not to mention new security vulnerabilities … Guys get mandrake free and install wine… even the review said it runs only like 3 windows programs and 99% vaporize…. hmm maybe it is vapor ware lol j/k
Looks like the Windows and Linux faithful are having an all out brawl over there in the NewsForge discussion forums over this new hybrid OS ‘Lindows’… I guess mixing fire and water is not a good thing! You got to go over and read some of the comments… talk about a TYSON/LEWIS punchout, and no pay-per-view costs either!
Could they have picked a stupider name for a Linux distribution?
Windows is a bad enough name for an OS but whadda ya expect from
BillCo. But Lindows? Even stupider. No creativity whatsoever.
I use Linux, Win2K, and BeOS. I’m all for expanding the user base
of Linux but this LindowsOS crap is not the way to go. Educating
average computer users a little would help more than this emulation
b.s. Everything has to be so dumbed down these days. People are just
too damn lazy, damn it! And why people want emulate the windows style
GUIs, I’ll never understand. Just butt ugly and unintuitive. Everyone
has got run windows apps, ms office apps, blah blah blah. If that’s
not proof enough of the absolute monopoly that MSFT has, then I don’t
know what is. Wow, the US government couldn’t have done a more piss
poor job on that issue.
Anyway, the point is: Windows is Windows and Linux is Linux. Each have
their pluses and minuses. If people are too lazy to learn anything, let
them use Windows. Let them have their lame ass email virii, stability
problems, and security issues. I’ll just continue to learn Linux and enjoy
the flexibility of having multiple OSen on my computers. Thanks, drive
through…
Windows was a pretty good name to describe it and very catchy (ovously sucessful). When it came out out their was DOS and other command line interfaces (Even the the reigning king C=64 was still comand line NO GEOS YET!!)
And someone remember **wasn’t Windows originally called something else? in the pre-version 3 releases?
But your right I do think Lindows name is a lame name.
People: the plural of virus is viruses. Look it up. Furthermore, if any of you opting for this pseudo-intellectual bastardization “virii” insist on exuding pretentiousness, at least exude prentiousness CORRECTLY! It would be viri, not two i’s, following Latin’s grammatical rules. Virii? Gawd.
I was a bit sceptical about the “viruses” but I found this page (at perl.com no less) http://www.perl.com/language/misc/virus.html that explains the whole thing – or at least it is confusing enough that I don’t want to mess with it. NJM – by the way I don’t think talking down to someone is really going to educate them at all. Most of us here are tech people, not doctors of english or latin.
go to http://toastytech.com/ and look at the Graphical User Interface Gallery for a look at the first release of Windows… IT SUCKED! it was quite possibly worse than Win98 (albeit more stable)
Recognize that to move people from Windows is a HUGE task and that it must be done in baby steps. Don’t think of Lindows as “the” solution, think of it as a step in the right direction. If people use and become comfortable with it, maybe they’ll say, “You know, I’m comfortable with Linux, I think I’ll try (insert fave distro name).” This is what you should hope for. Salvation does not always come in the form of the first viable alternative, but it often has just that to thank.
Tho i still don’t like the GUI of my current win98 it is much better than i have seen from common alternatives for linux. which ticks me off, because i am gonna be mirgrating soon and i want a pretty GUI to welcome me to *nix
.
but with windows 1.0 came one of the piss poorest ugly gui i have seen in a screenshot yet! Windows 2.0 was an overhaul and was butt ugly too! windows 3 atleast improved.
I am most interested in this legal actions Microsoft has taken against Lindows, for all the very funny MS nonsense that naturally comes out. Something didn’t work very well at the USA Patents&Trademark Office when they found registrable the word “Windows” for a Windowing System trademark.
I wonder if Xerox WIMP (Windows Menus Icons Pointers) is a registered trademark, or if Billg took the idea from the W Windowing System (remember first MS Windows was a 1983-84 Quick and Dirty OS windowed).
I don’t like the Lindows concept either, but anything that counteracts this public danger named Microsoft, anything like that suits me fine.
“§2 (15 U.S.C. §1052). Trademarks registrable on the principal register; concurrent registration
No trademark by which the goods of the applicant may be distinguished from the goods of others shall be refused registration on the principal register on account of its nature unless it–
d) Consists of or comprises a mark which so resembles a mark registered in the Patent and Trademark Office, OR A MARK OR TRADE NAME PREVIOUSLY USED IN THE UNITED STATES BY ANOTHER and not abandoned, as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive ”
Was “Windows Menus Icons Pointers” registered?, it certainly was commercially used by Xerox Star in 1981.
“(e) Consists of a mark which, (1) WHEN USED ON OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE GOODS OF THE APPLICANT IS MERELY DESCRIPTIVE or deceptively misdescriptive of them,…is primarily merely a surname, or (5) COMPRISES ANY MATTER THAT, AS A WHOLE, IS FUNCTIONAL.”
Does it get more functional than this???
Why can’t they never play fair? It’s like a Microsoft quintaessential to take possesion of a computing description, to always force the law. Who else could think of something like “KEYS” for a Keyboard trademark?. Most of us hate MS, and they well deserve it.
I am expecting since late August the Xandros Linux release, I read at Linuxgram.com that it was going to be released in a few weeks, and now this Lindows article talks about February, oh well…
I was surprise to read that Lindows is licensing from Xandros “an early pre-release version”, basically the File Manager I guess. I hope Lindows best of lucks, but honestly those Lindows screenshots look much uglier than Win95. For $99 the testing, they could put a little more effort in the design. I’m not running WINE.
Take a look at the Star of Windows, they should have call it “Xindows”:
http://www.cs.uregina.ca/~hoppe/Star%20-%20Desktop%20me…
I was just staring at the Xerox screenshot I posted before (http://www.cs.uregina.ca/~hoppe/Star%20-%20Desktop%20me…) and I noted a folder named “PC Emulator”. I have instantly associated that with Lindows and WINE, thinking it didn’t do too well that emulating biz.
Xerox Brother Dominic is GRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT!!!
“It’s a Miracle”
Hey Lindows, ‘Where’s the Beef?!’
all that i can say is that BEOS… WAS… and still is the os for me…
LONG LIVE BEOS… though i know if it’s not going to be devoliped then what is the use… and if palm made an os it would have to be beos or based off of it…
but anyway in 4 years i want a GOOD os that is not made by micro shit…
what do you think would me a good os?!?
thank you and good night…
Like it or not the Windows trademark is legitimate. The prohibitions for “functional” marks mean AFAIK that you can’t trademark a mark that does something, e.g. a diagram of how to use the product. If removing the mark would make the product hard to use, or difficult to understand or somehow “break” it then the mark is functional and cannot be a trademark. Windows does not meet that criteria by any stretch of the imagination.
The best defense Lindows.com had was just wrecked. They shipped a product. If you don’t actually sell anything then it’s much harder to win a trademark case against you. No matter that this was an invitation only preview, pre-alpha, not for discussion with minors version of the product, it cost $99 and Bill’s legal team are IMHO certain to win now if Lindows.com doesn’t fold first.
I KNEW we couldn’t go a discussion without someone crying about his poor, poor BeOS
But seriously, Matt, why does it matter to you WHO makes you’re OS? I’m currently a Linux user, but I was excited when XP came out because I thought that it was going to be as good as OS X (though it turns out to just have been over-hyped).
I won’t mind using the next gen of Windows as long as:
– it doesn’t suck (stable, nice GUI, no more huge obtrusive buttons everywhere, and does look like a Fisher Price toy)
– Microsoft cleans up their act, in terms of business practices.
We’re here ’cause we want an OS, not an OS NOT made by Microsoft.
I really don’t see what right microsoft has to sue lindows over the use of ‘dows’ in their name. Soon the Star Trek and Star Wars people will be suing each other for stealing the word ‘Star’ from their movies/series. lol.
“I won’t mind using the next gen of Windows as long as:
– it doesn’t suck (stable, nice GUI, no more huge obtrusive buttons everywhere, and does look like a Fisher Price toy)
– Microsoft cleans up their act, in terms of business practices. ”
I really don’t think that is possible anymore. They had chances and showed they had no intention of doing either.
I did not like travestis so, when i want to run Windows applications i boot on windows, when i want to feel like if i know UNIX i boot on FreeBSD, but when i want to enjoy my computer i boot on my beos partition. <guess wich version
>
“I really don’t see what right microsoft has to sue lindows over the use of ‘dows’ in their name.”
Lindows, Windows for me it’s not only dows which are the same but all the word beside one letter.
So yes they have the right to sue lindows as the name is pratically the same and they are running the same kind of business ( there is a law about that in france, i think it’s the same for other countries ).
It will be the same if someone will create a company with mycrosoft as named…Don’t you think for exemple that AOL won’t sue a new ISP companie with the name of A0L ( it’s a zero ) ? same for ibm with ibn…see the point ?
Anyway lindows is the crappiest things atm for linux….And i’d like to see how they will deal with licence stuff…( they are using wine for ex for emulating windows…).
Well either way I think Micro$oft might see these people as a threat to their OS market think that the normal consumers might assume that ‘Lindows’ is the answer for “Linux For Dummies” with a Windows like nature. If they don’t have the famous ‘Blue Screen Of Death’ they better stop while they’re ahead he he!
Maybe they should have tried “Winux”? Would M$ be happier or angier about that one?
I don’t see why some people are saying that Lindows will somehow be a way for people to step away from the MS monopoly. When in reality, if this distro is successful in running a great majority of big name MS apps, this will just extend it. The Windows OS market is pretty much gone as far as it will go, as far as individual sales. MS makes a majority of its cash on Office. So all this has the potential to do, is make more cash for MS. I would think Microsoft would be happy if Lindows ran their apps with functionality enough to purchase them. It would open a new revenue stream without ever having to write a line of code. It’s ironic that on an OS that is being touted as a way to remove yourself from the MS grip, and towards open software with open standards, that people are getting excited about running closed monopolized software. If you want to run or have the need to run Windows apps, you’re going to run Windows, or so common sense would tell you. And if you run Linux and you are unsatisfied with how the comparative Linux apps work, you get on the dev list and try and make some changes. There is absolutely no advantage to the user and or the Linux community in trying to make compatibility with MS software. Because 1-You still have to buy the MS software. 2-The software will never function 100% properly. And 3-It is counter productive to the open source community and all the time spent on making software and pursuing new users to freely available alternative applications, e.g.; KOffice ,Open Office, etc. To help the MS software run and extend their monopoly is interesting indeed. Why not put all this energy of making emulators into developing the big OSS apps into high quality software that functions comparatively to their MS counterparts, yet is still in line with what Linux is all about?
You said
“Like it or not the Windows trademark is legitimate. The prohibitions for “functional” marks mean AFAIK that you can’t trademark a mark that does something, e.g. a diagram of how to use the product.”
Wrong, that is not the only case for functionality being compromised on a trademark, no need of legal expertise to understand that (although I’m an Intellectual Property lawyer at Spain, I have some experience registering trademarks). Most cases compromising functionality are seen in non-graphical trademarks, for example, trademarking “liquid brakes” IS compromising the functionality of a car liquid brakes. “Brakes” is a generic for car brakes, and “liquid” is the description that compromises functionality, those “brakes” function with that “liquid”.
Sames goes for Windows, like it or not, it is not originally legitimate to register that Word as Windowing System trademark. I have said originally, because a descriptive trademark may gain distinction over the years (you have to probate that of course). That cannot be the case of MS Windows, for various reasons.
One is that the word was already used by Xerox Star “Windows Icons Menus Pointers”. That windowing concept was already used also by the W Windowing System. None of them ever tried to trademark such a computing description. “Overlapping and tiling windows”, and “the window system” were in the mouth of any seller and user of Xerox Star or Apple Lisa. MS windowed its DOS, and naturally followed its well established tradition of forcing the law.
Everything around Windows as a computing trademark leads to nonsense, care to study any GUI-WIMP principles. There is more ground for confusing Windows with DEC Windows or X Windows, than with Lindows. If we were talking about “wheels” for bycicles the same topic would arise:
“DEC Wheels, X Wheels, Wheels, or Sheels?” whose trademark for a bycicle’s wheel?
Kudos to Lindows for standing tall against this bully.
I admire Lindows guts but … reality check.
In the real world people aren;t going to fork out $99 dollars, buy an OS they got with their computer and then spend the rest of their lives trying to get their apps and the latest hardware to work – no sireee.
I would love a viable alternative to MS. But I’ve said this before – Linux is great on the server and rocks for software development, but at the moment Windows gives you (more or less hassle free):
1) better games
2) better multimedia
3) much faster and better web surfing
4 ) better and more standard biz apps
Lindows better offer a lot more for people to even think about switching from an OS that came ‘free’ with their OS. Remember most people out their using computers aren;t techie. If the Lindows guys are going to address this they will then find they run into the sticky issue of balancing a biz plan against implications of GPLing code. Tough one.
Having said all that I wish the Lindows guys the best of luck.
Tony
I can’t, in the farthest stretch of my imagination concieve of the incremental possibility of this product providing any benefit to computer users, whatsover. A crippled and unstable version of linux emulating an ugly GUI that can barely perform the one function its name implies. I just keep wondering why.
Their efforts would have been much better spent just improving wine.
A product like this will do more harm than anything. What will the potential linux newbie think when their first experience involves a flaky filesystem, virus and security breech prone system that most notably WON’T RUN his apps as promised. It’s like getting food poisoning the first time you try calamari. We may never hear from potential alternative OS person again.
I realize this is a pre-release, but it sounds like they have a LOT to work on before this product can be taken seriously.
/codefire said
would love a viable alternative to MS. But I’ve said this before – Linux is great on the server and rocks for software development, but at the moment Windows gives you (more or less hassle free):
1) better games
2) better multimedia
3) much faster and better web surfing
4 ) better and more standard biz apps
………… /
1) NWN (among few others) will appear on GNU/linux, GNU/linux is better for software developement and there are many people that just want to port games and/or develop them on GNU/linux
2) XMMS and MPlayer are just great and are free, blender is good, gimp is near perfection, what else is needed ?
3) Mozilla is way better than IE on my configuration, tabbed browsing and sideboards are comfort that IE doesn’t have, the e-mail client is surely surer than Outlook.
4) what you mean with standard? One choice over one? ON GNU I have plenty of choice.
my point
How many of these people are there?
The distinction “Marques” brings in is about DESCRIPTIVE trademarks ie Generics, not functional ones. Maybe it’s a language barrier? There’s nothing functional about the words “Liquid brakes” but you can’t trademark “Liquid brakes” as a name for brakes that use liquid because it’s purely descriptive. Functionality doesn’t come into it.
However “Liquid brakes” could be a legitimate trademark for a computer game, or a software DVD feature that reduced disk wear through advanced motor control.
There are plenty of generic terms for what Microsoft sells, that is words or phrases that are descriptive and could not be trademarked; “Desktop environment”, “Operating system”, “Graphical user interface”, even “Windowing system”. However the generic term “windows” is not one of them. That describes holes in the wall, bits of glass and rectangular screen areas, none of which Microsoft sell. Hence it can be (and is) a Microsoft trademark.
If you can’t understand why “windows” isn’t a generic term for the Operating System that Microsoft sells then ask yourself why “ford” isn’t a generic term for the cars that Ford sells. It’s a word, right? You can drive a car through a ford, right? So it must be a generic term? No.
NoBeForMe, no one said “windows” was generic, I said it was descriptive of a window system functionality. You should know that when MS registered it back in 1983-84, Windows was not an Operating System, but a window system and nothing else. Back then and now operating system that integrate a WIMP GUI are often referred as window systems.
Althought generics were not relevant in this matter, you seem not to have a very clear idea of what a generic is. It’s not about generics anyway, it’s about description, compromising functionality and precedent use on the trade, and about the scope of such a sign if it ever gains distinctiveness. Your comparison about Fords is absolutely hopeless. What about Ford trademarking a car “Wheels”? Do you get it now? Its not Ford, it’s the wheels. It’s not the operating system, it’s the window system compromised by all the operating systems that integrate such windowing, such windows. Again, care to study a WIMP GUI essay, and convince yourself of how much is description compromised here.
Matt K said:
> Their efforts would have been much better spent just improving wine.
Absolutely. This is where the real value add is. They are going to need to pump resources into WINE like crazy, as they will need to keep up with new versions of Office and other MS apps. Not to mention things like Outlook, Lotus Notes etc.. etc..
Actually WINE has a permissive license so they may be able to develop it and retain their IP. Not sure though.
Tony
Lu_zero said:
>1) NWN (among few others) will appear on GNU/linux, GNU/linux is better for >software developement and there are many people that just want to port games >and/or develop them on GNU/linux
I do agree Linux is very good for software development (my OS of choice). However, Linux native games have been very much delayed compared to Windows version and often more expensive too! Not all games work well or even at all under WINE – and WINE can be tricky to set up.
2) XMMS and MPlayer are just great and are free, blender is good, gimp is near perfection, what else is needed ?
Fair enough
But getting drivers for some of the latest DVD drives and other multimedia hardware for laptops can be a bitch with Linux 
3) Mozilla is way better than IE on my configuration, tabbed browsing and sideboards are comfort that IE doesn’t have, the e-mail client is surely surer than Outlook.
Really. The last time I tried Mozilla it was very big and very slow. I was using Netscape, but it was slow compared to MSIE and buggy.
4) what you mean with standard? One choice over one? ON GNU I have plenty of choice.
Well most people out there have some experience with windows. They are used to Word, Excel, Powerpoint and other ‘standard’ apps. They are standard because this is the OS and apps that comes on peoples PCs when they buy one. My point was that while I think this is a very unhealthy situation, people aren;t going to pay $99 dollars to go from something they feel safe with to an unknown.
I think Lindows and other OS creators (not many left now) really need to be available as an pre-installed option on PCs. That is going to be the deciding factors for the success of alternative OSs.
I’m not really trying to knock Linux, but I do think Lindows and other alternative OSs are really up against it.
Tony
You said, “…( they are using wine for ex for emulating windows…).”
Actually, WINE stands for Wine is NOT an Emulator. It actually provides the Windows API’s for Windows applications to run. It does NOT emulate any hardware at all.