Home > Oracle and SUN > Quick Review of Xandros 3 Quick Review of Xandros 3 Submitted by Tim 2005-01-07 Oracle and SUN 8 Comments Xandros believes in the latter and their polished look and graphic install make it all the easier for the new user to make the transition to Linux. Read the rest of the review here. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 8 Comments 2005-01-07 2:28 pm Anonymous Great review but here is a better/quicker one: “I installed Zandros 3. It seems to work fine and it looks good though there is nothing new.” 2005-01-07 11:01 pm Anonymous ” Linux in 2004 was very impressive. i am pretty excited about 2005 and beyond check out my fedora core screenshots i ” I agree, look at the difference between gnome 2.4-2.8, Xandros 3, the advent of ubuntu..etc.. BTW, is anyone else happy to finally see a sane file manager in Linux? And nice screencaptures 2005-01-07 11:05 pm Anonymous May want to try ln -s /dev/audio1 /dev/dsp Linux has problems with multiple soundcards, even what you wouldn’t normally call a soundcard. Eg., my soundblaster live wouldn’t work until I realized that my REALTEK network card was also being detected as some kind of soundcard, ac 97. Of course I’ve never heard it since i have the internet on cable. Anyway, the reason digital output works in all cases is due to bypassing alsa. 2005-01-07 11:08 pm Anonymous control center, choose audio devices, in other options type hw:1,0 2005-01-08 12:02 am Anonymous People who like a distribution always talk about the “polish” it has. They also use the words “simple”, “clean”, “refined”, and “easy to use” just as this author has. The only problem is that these words have become really meaningless. When people talk about these things, they usually aren’t refering to the things I think they should mean. For example, a lot of times the term polish is used to denote pleasing graphics. While I am a graphics snob (I’m a Mac fan as well as a Linux one), that’s not what I see as polish. In this regard, Ubuntu and Debian would have very little polish as they are, well, a bit ugly. By the same token, Fedora would have a ton of polish. In reality, I find that (using my definition of polish), Ubuntu and Debian are much more polished than Fedora. Now, Fedora is very good and I’m only using it as an example because I don’t find SuSE, Mandrake, Xandros, etc. pleasing to the eye. I do find that Fedora isn’t as polished when it comes to the code, layout, testing, etc. as Debian or Ubuntu. Of course, you don’t find that in a short review. You find that after months and months of use of them. The same with “easy to use”. For example, Windows does most of the configuration of wireless networks by itself and nothing is intimidating, but it is flaky. That flakyness makes it much more difficult to use in my use of the term “easy to use”. By the same token, GUI editors are usually “easier to use” at a cursory glance, but editors like vim and emacs are used by people for reasons – this could also be an example of polish where an installation of vim or emacs runs perfectly how it is supposed to while a GUI is more buggy, but the GUI looks prettier. The same concepts apply to clean and refined. Is it the clean way that apt-get installs new packages without problems or the clean way that some apps start-up screen looks? Is it the refined system of placing things in the filesystem or the icons you made? I’m not trying to claim that people shouldn’t be interested in GUIs and eye candy. I’m just saying that there are other things that need to be considered alongside that and fall into these categories. If you are looking for something that is Windows but geekier sounding, these might not be your concerns, but if you are really looking for something better then you have to look at these things that aren’t shown in screenshots. 2005-01-08 10:29 am Anonymous how many xandros reviews does a (relatively) small website need? it’d be nice to see some fresh faces, as far as reviews go. this is easily the seventh xandros review i’ve read, and considering it’s not even in the ten most popular distros (according to distrowatch) i don’t see why it needs so much coverage.. 2005-01-08 7:05 pm Anonymous Check distrowatch I advocate Xandros only because it is the only linux distro that newtorks perfectly with Windows. But it is unfotunate that XFM is propriety. 2005-01-10 1:47 am Anonymous KDE / X not working so hot with Emachine computers . Intel has said they will only support Redhat and Suse operating systems therefore my Xandros version 2 wont even boot into KDE correctly. Stall half the time.