How long has Lindows been finalizing this? they will never come out.

http://newsforge.com/art...1811226&mode=nested

Doesn't sound to good.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

that claim WINE doesn't work.

Check out crossover office! http://codeweavers.com/products/office/

Fewt,

I have to say that your zealous uninformed pollyanna...

OMFG! Okay, I take back what I said about Wine. Clearly CodeWeavers (and Transgaming) know what they're doing. People (like me) who had been testing (and laughing at) the current mainstream Wine definitely need to take a look at these forks.

Nevertheless, unless Lindows has redistribution contracts with CodeWeavers (and Transgaming would be a nice plus), I don't think we'll see anything this earth-shattering out of Lindows.

However, I am really REALLY impressed. And a bit puzzled. But that's normal.

CatBus

I suspect Lindows won't be all that sucessful, especially with the $99.00 preview fee. However, should Mandrake, or Lycoris contract with Codeweavers we may end up with a viable alternative O/S desktop for everyone.

Here's my vision of a worst-case scenario...

Microsoft, after years of legal battles, decides to call it quits in the desktop consumer market and concentrate on higher profit margin software services and server applications.

Through legal issues, Microsoft was forced to open its source code to Windows. MS promptly told the industry it was no longer developing or selling Windows. ( do you think they wouldn’t do it? Push anyone far enough, and they’ll get tired of it)

The industry becomes even more fragmented as dozens of software companies position themselves for the biggest market share. The standard for operating systems becomes even more fragmented. Now, there are three separate segments. Linux compatible, Windows compatible, and Apple.

Linux has multiple distributions that may or may not have windows compatibility.

The Windows compatible OS companies each have modified windows source code, and this segment suffers from the same fragmentation that all the Linux distributions have.

Apple is ....... well, Apple.

Software developers become increasingly frustrated because their applications may or may not run properly from one distribution to the next. Because of the complexity of the changes made to each distribution, they may or may not support all the same hardware as well.

Costs skyrocket. Hardware manufacturers are forced to write drivers for entirely too many OS’s . Enterprise customers are forced to be locked into Compaq/HP Windows just to get some semblance of order and sense to their IT infrastructure and desktop plans. Years of progress in computing will once again be erased, as proprietary software becomes the norm.

Generally, it will be a pain in the ass.

Now here’s what I feel would be the best case scenario. The ENTIRE industry (including Microsoft) needs to group together and allow IEEE to set consensus standards to which software will be written. Any deviation from these standards would be considered taboo.

Innovation would not be dead, because any company could write new software and submit it to be the standard. This would ensure that only the best software made it to market.
No one company would be able to force its standard on anyone.

Here’s something that Ive been thinking about. What if operating systems were considered a commodity and became regulated much in the way electricity is? Lets say there was a regulatory body that set minimum standards for security, peformance, etc? Wouldnt that force quality software?

Just something to consider and discuss. What do you guys see as the best and worst case scenarios that could happen to the computer industry?

just some late night caffeine fueled ramblings. =)

it will at least be successful in beating microsoft at something - being the least secure OS ever! For a start there is the logging in and running everything as root issue. Secondly there is the problem of how patches are applied... for example, the zlib/libz bug found the other week required a recompile of kernals to fix, do the lindows people really expect home users who bought lindows off the shelf to recompile the kernal every time there is a security issue with it!? people will never install the patches if that is the case.

Does Microsoft or Apple require a user to recompile a kernel? No, just like the folks at Lindows, RedHat, Caldera and all of the other software companies on the face of the earth, they compile it and package it FOR YOU. It's as easy as click click click reboot.

so why did all the reports i read about the zlib issue say it would require the user to recompile the kernal?

Lack of educated journalism. Your vendor will compile it for you, and package it into a nice little installer. All the end user will need to do is click click click click. Advanced users however may opt to patch, and recompile themselves instead of using the vendor supplied kernel.

Buying software?? Who pays for software??

000100111001110100010101010000111011111001...
that's everywhere!!

"Hm. $100.00 for a beta of a linux based OS, when I can download a few FULL RELEASE distros for free. $100.00 for a Beta of a linux based OS, when (as an OEM) I can spend that on a Full Version of 1 of 3 MS Windows OSes... I just can't decide!"
Heck, if it is virtually the same as all other distros of Linux, I'll put a free version of "Lycorice" Linux on. I *know* I can build a system with that one, and have it internet ready.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I think you spotted the wrong flaw in their big plan. I know lots of people in the world who will turn up their noses at free/inexpensive stuff, and pay good money for inferior goods simply because they think "you get what you pay for".

Frankly, Lindows could charge $100 for their distro, only supply source code to paying customers, and do all sorts of GPL-compliant-but-still-kinda-dumb things and they'd be okay...

...if Wine worked like they say it does. Hint: it doesn't. Oh well, another day, another dot-com flop. They made some good headlines, though.

And thanks to MS, lots of "free press" hehehe!!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

well looks like i can go and sue apple corporation now.... cause u cant tradmark a word... and since apple is trademarked..... anyone else with me? haha

Excellent example.. Don't even claim to have dreamed that are making an OS called MAKNUX that can run classic and Carbon applications on a linux environment with a Liquix GUI. You know Apple doesn't blink when it comes to lawsuits. I believe Lindows is violating Microsoft's trademark by creating a business model that depends on getting Microsoft Windows ® users to convert to their product. Tell the judge to look at Lindow's website for a change.

"I believe Lindows is violating Microsoft's trademark by creating a business model that depends on getting Microsoft Windows ® users to convert to their product. "

That has to be the most rediculous statement ever. What else would they be doing with the name. The simple fact is that MS named the OS a commonly used name. If I am the first person to sell pencils and the world knows them as pencils and i trademark that name i am just as dumb as the rediculous law suit.

I beleive Lindows to be the biggest load of crap. I'm almost positive that we will not see a version of Lindows that works up to all the hype that Lindows.com has been building for the past few months. No I'm not a Microsoft supporter, but I figure if you wanna run Windows based software you need a Microsoft based OS, not some frankenstein of an OS that is exposed to magicly run Windows apps. Either go all Linux or got all Windows or just dual boot.

Another fine example of MS's illegal monopolization.

"Kuney introduced a Microsoft memo to Ballmer, from the spring of 2000, that called into question Dell Computer Corp.'s backing of Linux. The memo said it was "untenable that a Windows Premier Partner would be promoting Linux." A subsequent memo, from early 2001, showed that Dell had disbanded its Linux business unit, laid off the head of the unit and dispersed the talent, Kuney said. He introduced other similar memos regarding Compaq Computer Corp.'s Linux push and Microsoft's alleged pressure on Compaq to "meet demand but not help create demand" for Linux. "

http://www.eweek.com/art...1884&a=24242,00.asp

Fewt, you posted "Another fine example of MS's illegal monopolization" (no suprise there, hehe).

I would say it was more a moron's stupid memos getting leaked, and has nothing to do with the Lindows/Microsoft story (HAH!) Just because someone wrote a memo, doesn't mean it is "Micro$oft Policy".

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

"doesn't mean it is "Micro$oft Policy"

Policy to what, obey the law? ;-)

A lot of things can get done through memos. It doesn't necessarily have to be any major "official" stance for action to take place. And if it was sent out on MS letterhead, then it doesn't matter who did the sending. It was official correspondence. Unless they're going to claim someone broke in and stole the letterhead and forged signatures.

Probably some dead guy.

If they can sign petitions, why not? :)

heh

What is the point of lindows? Is it better application compatibility for existing linux users? because they dont seem to have gotten anywhere close to achieving that so far with lindows. Is it to convert existing windows home users? well that plain and simple isnt going to happen because 1) lindows ISNT free - infact the prices arent far off the off windows prices. 2) directx doesnt work properly apparently(kindof a requirement for home users!). 3) it is still too much hassle to end up with a system which wont run most new software when it comes out. So no it wont attract home users either. Is it for corporates?! well no because of this little line I found somewhere "The LindowsOS EULA states the software can be installed on as many machines as you like so long as you are the sole user, thus the software is licensed to you and not the computer" you have to take notice of the use of the word "sole" user.... makes me think each user will require a license still - and at least when you pay a license for windows it means you get support from microsoft and the application developers.

It all seems a little too hopeful to me on the lindows peoples side.

second sneak preview with "big performance and compatibility improvements."...."Sneak Preview 2 still won't be quite ready for use as your daily desktop solution..."

And neither will the *final* version with the "biggest performance and compatibility improvements". The biggest issue I see with "lindows", other than a ridicolous name! is the possible user base. Windows users aren't about to flock to a new OS which offers "some" Windows compatibilities, and the Open-Source community will not pay for something that is essentially Linux + Wine.

Righty.

Unless they have made some insane improvements to Wine somehow, and I don't know what that would be. DirectX for Lindows?

Well from what little info I could find out about the product all the first preview version consisted of was linux+wine+some setup tweaks to import your mail+bookmarks from windows. Hardly revolutionary. Certainly not worth paying for.

I also seriously doubt they can do anything significant to improve it in preview 2. It is afterall just wine, which has been in development years and still has a loooong way to go before reaching the compatibility that lindows claims, so I dont see how the lindows team can suddenly make the wine project jump forward significantly.

Lindows Sneak Preview 2: Codename Winux

Wine is slated to reach 1.0 before the end of the year. If you haven't used it in the last 12 months, you're in for a surprise. I've come across few apps that didn't work with it.

http://appdb.codeweavers.com/

Minitab - Doesn't work
Mathcad - Starts up but isn't usable
Protel - No mention of it, definitely wouldn't work
Visio - Starts up but is very flakey, doesn't save etc.
3DS Max - No mention of it, highly doubtful
MetaStock - No mention of it, again doubtful
Money - Doesn't run
Office XP - Big problems...
Adobe Premier - Ha! As if!

Well I don't need to go on, there's no way I'm changing to an OS which cannot run the above programs. And no I'm not switching to a less than adequate 'alternative'. This v1.0 of Wine that you speak of better be something quite impressive.

Fewt, what color is the sky in your world?????
Tell me does your Linux distro do your dishes too?
I bet you have a quantum light based pc that runs Linux like the wind...and oh! it seeks and destroys all Microsoft software, and recompiles it all in FEWT LINUX code!!!!!!

LMAO!!!!!!!

ROFLLMAO!!!!!!!!!!

{8-D

I would sure like it if they didn't charge for their betas, they could get a lot more people in the beta if it were free, or do some kind of 30 day thing.

Dito

It is all too Microschmuckish to charge for betas.

indeed... I was quite interested and went on over to their site a few months ago intending to try it. Then when I saw they were charging even for the beta my reaction was "whats the point?! if it isnt free i'll just stick with microsoft thanx!"

They arent going to get anywhere like this, at least when microsoft charges for a beta there is already enough interest in it and leaks of it for people who make the effort to get it for free - this allows people to try it and see what its all about. With lindows people dont really know what its about and cant try it for free either because there isnt enough interest in it for there to be leaked copies around.

Maybe they are relying on people NOT being able to try before they buy because they wont actually be buying anything near as good as the marketing hype claims it is!

EXCUSE ME?

Microsoft doesn't charge for their beta's....

not exactly true... they charge for the postage+media on their preview editions. Although I dont remember microsoft charging anything like what lindows previews cost.

I think charging for the beta is a joke myself.

Microsoft DOESN"T Charge For The BETA Team, Any Other User Is Not Part of the Team, so therefor your charged for beta(preview) software.

Lindows is Got a Big Mountain To Climb. Namely Microsoft Mountain. I Don't think they'll ever make it to the Top.

I paid exactly $20.00 for the XP RC1 and got XP RC2 free (both downloads). I see no reason to pay $100.00 for a BETA of ANY software! Especially when I can just call a warehouse, and for that $100.00 I can get one of 3 different FULL OEM MS Windows OSes.
Isn't Linux supposed to be this wonderful, free for download (usually) and inexpensive OS? Seems the Lindows people are out to make $$$$ from it. What a novel concept- making money ;-)

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Lindows is certainly an interesting concept, but I have serious doubts as to its viability in the marketplace.

As someone else pointed out, Windows users aren't likely to switch to a half-assed compatible system when Windows does all they want, and Linux users will NEVER switch to an OS they have to pay MS-like prices for, when they can download their favorite flavor of Linux for free and install WINE to run their few Windows programs.

And now they're charging 100$ US (about $150 CDN) for a BETA? Michael Robertson is smoking rope! He needs to give his head a shake and snap back to reality. Even MS don't charge for their Beta and Release Candidate versions. With MS, you pay a small fee ($15 CDN for Win XP RC 1 & 2)for the admin charges, and shipping charges to get the CD delivered, but that's fair.

I'm glad Lindows won their court case with MS, however. This whole suit story is another pathetic attempt by MS to prevent competitors, regardless of how flaky their ideas are, from getting a foothold in the OS marketplace.

The "Consumer Previews" are NOT part of the "Official" beta programs although they contain beta software. I am a Microsoft Beta Tester and have never paid a red cent/shilling in postage or for media of any kind.

Yeah, heh :)

I think Microsoft was charging a fair price for the XP preview(s) considering bandwidth costs and the whole administration of the project. How much is Lindows really going to cost if you have to pay so much for the beta? Talk about getting what you paid for... Imagine somebody at a computer store choosing Lindows over Windows to save a few bucks. He would think is not that much different since it claims to runs windows apps. (duwhs), but he would be in for a nightmare when his new Athlon 2000+ can't run almost anything.

if a company wants to try and compete with microsoft they have to make pc manufacturers ship it with their new pc's instead of windows. thats where they get 90% of their money from. people wont want to pay for an OS called Lindows when winXP just came free with their pc

The Windows betas (*all* of them) cost $0.00.

Nada.

Zero.

Bupkis.

Only the Preview Programs (which are not the same as the beta programs) cost any money (and none of them cost as much as the Lindows Insider program).

I should know, as I've been in in *several* Windows beta programs (including most of their operating systems, both 9x and NT-based). Number of betas I've paid for: none.