Log in

View Full Version : Lindows / Lin---s

2004-03-06, 18:47
I decided to try out Linux and I ordered the 7-CD set for $20 from one of the sites listed by debian.org (http://www.debian.org/). The installation was difficult and it asked me several questions during the process, which I didn't know the answer to. After it all was done and installed, I ended up with a command prompt that was unappealing to me. What I needed instead was Linux with a graphical interface. With such a thing Linux could be popular with desktop users. So I tried out Lindows (http://www.lindows.com/), which is basically a Linux operating system that has the graphical windowing appeal of Windows.

At their site they sell the Lindows operating system for varying prices, depending on how you choose to receive it. The Lindows EULA (http://www.lindows.com/lindows_products_OSEULA.php) is more liberal than Microsoft's. But besides that there is nothing to prevent you from breaking the EULA and making several copies for your friends. Lindows does not have an online product registration that is needed to activate it. The cheapest method is to download it for $25 by way of a BitTorrent link, which saves them on their bandwidth. Otherwise the standard purchase is $50 to download it from their site, and $60 plus shipping when you order it by CD to come in the mail. I chose to purchase Lindows 4.5 by CD. But rather than waiting for the CD to arrive in the mail, I decided to download it immediately. Once I purchased it I was able to login at their site with my e-mail and chosen password. The download was a 421 MB iso file. I burned the iso file to a CD, and booted up with it on my laptop.

The installation was very easy and quick. Afterwards I found that it automatically connected to my router on the LAN, and I was able to access the WAN internet. The default installation in Lindows is to install the user as "root". That is the equivalent in Microsoft of "administrator". It means to have full priveleges. While some see a security vulnerability in that, if you are installing it on a home computer rather than a public computer, that is the easiest choice for you.

I noticed that it actually takes Lindows longer to boot up when turning on the computer than Windows XP does.

The File Manager allows you to see all the files on the computer. To see the structure of the files on your hard drive, you would browse into the "System" directory.

Lindows comes with a few basic programs, and has the feel of Windows. It has a text editor, a browser, XMMS mp3 player, K3b CD burner, an image viewer, calculator, and some others. It seems to have used the KDE desktop (http://www.kde.org/) and integrated it into Lindows. In order to add more programs, you can do it the easy way, which is through the Click-N-Run service of Lindows. The problem with that is you would have to pay them $15 a month to access the CNR Wharehouse. Most of the stuff there can be found for free.

Installing programs without using the CNR Wharehouse is more difficult though. I believe Lindows has made it this way because they want to encourage people to pay the subscription for the wharehouse. The good thing about the CNR wharehouse is that it is unlimited, so you could get all the programs you need in a month for the price of $15.

To download programs without using their Click-N-Run service, you would seek all Linux versions of programs to download. They will often have a file extension of tar.gz, known as a "tarball". For example, say you want to download Mozilla (http://www.mozilla.org/). Go to the website and find the version of it for Linux, right-click on the link and select "save link target as". You can save it to an easy directory for you to find from the File Manager, such as "My Documents".

Afterwards you can use the File Manager to see the file on your computer that you've just downloaded. In the example given, it is mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu-1.6-installer.tar.gz. Now I find the file and right-click on it, and select "Extract here", and then select to extract all the files. It will then unzip the files. What this gives me is an extracted folder named mozilla-installer. Unfortunately at this point you then have to open up the Console to finalize the process. Going into the Console is like going into the DOS command prompt in Windows. These are the steps I took in the Console, typed in yellow. The computer name is "Dionysus":

Dionysus:~# dir
Desktop Mail My\ Computer My\ Documents Network system-setup
Dionysus:~# cd My\ Documents
Dionysus:~/My Documents# dir
My\ Music mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu-1.6-installer.tar.gz mozilla-installer
Dionysus:~/My Documents# cd mozilla-installer
Dionysus:~/My Documents/mozilla-installer# ./mozilla-installer

The command dir lists all files within a directory, and the command cd changes to another directory. You have to be in the same directory as the installation file, so you will have to use cd to change into it. The folders are case sensitive, so typing in cd My\ documents wouldn't work here. I could have shortened the process by typing in two steps directly from the beginning: cd My\ Documents/mozilla-installer and then ./mozilla-installer. Also, the tarball can be extracted directly from the Console, but I prefer avoiding the Console as much as possible, and extracted it using the File Manger instead.

By default Mozilla was created and installed in the directory My Computer/System/usr/local/mozilla. It unfortunately in the installation process didn't create a shortcut in the Programs menu of Lindows. I went into the directory containing the new Mozilla installation and found two shell scripts: one named "mozilla" and the other named "run-mozilla.sh". The reason it's good to know what the shell script files are, is so that if you want to create a shortcut in the Lindows start menu, then you would use the shell script file as the command line. I was actually able to run Mozilla from the File Manager by double-clicking on the shell script. Here's how I added the Mozilla shortcut to the Programs menu: I right-clicked on the Lindows start icon, and chose "Menu Editor". I then went into the folders Programs-->Internet and on top clicked "new item". It asked me the name, which I chose to name as "Mozilla 1.6". Then for the command, which is the path of the shell script file, I chose usr/local/mozilla/mozilla. I couldn't figure how to give it an icon though. The whole Menu Editor process is cumbersome, because you can't directly right click and add or see the properties of the items in the Lindows start menu. You can see the properties of items on the desktop though, by right clicking.

Afterwards I tried to install OpenOffice (http://www.openoffice.org/). That seemed to involve a two-step process. First I extracted the tarball. Then I activated in in the Console. When I examined its newly created folder in My Computer/System/usr/local/OpenOffice.org1.1.0, I thought it would be ready to run after installing it from the Console. I ended up having to run the shell script named "setup", which did the final installation of the program into the created directory My Computer/root/OpenOffice.org1.1.0. That installation created shortcuts in the Lindows start menu. Maybe the reason the Mozilla installation didn't create shortcuts, is because the browser that comes with Lindows is actually Mozilla, and the program refused to create extra shortcuts. They must be closely related except for a few details. When I changed the home page in Mozilla, it also changed in the Lindows browser. The difference between the two is that when you launch the Lindows browser, it says "Lindows Internet suite" on top, and when Mozilla is launched, it says "Mozilla" at the top of the screen.

2004-03-07, 13:12
Even though I consider myself a downloading expert I'm not a computer fanatic and don't have the inclination to stray from the bosom of Mother Microsoft. She serves me well for a minumum effort required on my part.


2004-03-07, 15:05
I wouldn't of gone with Lindows, I don't have many reasons as to why because I haven't used it, but I always hear people in the IRC channels dissing Lindows

If you wanted a user-friendly version with good speed, stability, and security you should of gone with Redhat....even Mandrake now... most versions of Linux have broken away from the straight console and added the GUI now that way to get the attention of more people...the easier something is, the more likely people are to use it...ah, the power of laziness....oh, and pretty colors.

I noticed KDE has taken the XP Playskool approach to their new desktop environments...but it still looks nice...of course you can get skins and all that anyway so it doesn't really matter all that much

I've been debating for a while to put Linux on this computer, I did make 1 attempt last year, or the year before, I can't really remember, to put Redhat on but I was doing that through VM Ware that way I didn't have to format and all that good stuff, so that ran like complete shit because I only have a 733mhz and to power 2 running OS's at the same time is quite the task for this old Dell...but I do plan to do a full blown Linux install, and I will be goin with Red Hat, simply because that's the only version of Linux I already have ...well, my brother has SuSe, but I don't like that version

oh yeah, and startx is your friend...took me a while to figure out why I couldn't start linux ;) lol <--- complete newbie

2004-03-07, 20:25
I read in an article (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/36033.html) that Linux is modular, meaning that you can easily install and uninstall programs by deleting the folders that they are in. I recall having trouble with my first computer when I went to undelete a program by deleting its folder off of the hard drive, rather than going into the Control Panel menu and uninstalling it.

My first computer came with a 1.6 GB hard drive, 16 MB of memory, a 33.6 K modem, and a 133 mhz processor with Windows 95, and a 15 inch monitor for $1500.

My uncle sent me this e-mail commenting about Linux:
Debian does not have a slick installation procedure. (Easy post-install administration is its forte.) They expect you to have the knowledge to make various decisions during the installation. Other distributions, like Mandrake, RedHat and SuSE, do have slick installation procedures. Recent versions are even easier and faster to install than Windows. (Most people never install Windows--buying a machine with it already loaded doesn't count.)

As far as ease of use and user-friendliness is concerned--that is in the eye of the beholder. I find Windows to be neither easy to use nor user-friendly. Once you learn what the various (non-intuitive) combinations of key-strokes and mouse-clicks do, you can shuffle around files and launch programs adequately (although it seems a slow way to work). The continual requests for confirmation ("Do you *really* want to send this file to the trash bin?", etc.), which seem friendly on first encounter, encourage people to click automatically, with occasional disastrous consequences. The eye-candy gets in the way when presenting information. The help system never provides me with any help--it seems to know only what I already know. When I try to find out how to do anything more than superficial, I get very frustrated. I could go on....

2004-03-20, 19:13
command line is something very powerfull
ive only used a little but even installing some u need a lot more info
i found debian to be a piece of shit waste for 7 cd''s of dl which i used 3 or 4 and not even all of those cd''s were used for installing stuff
red hat sucked when they got all licencish (no idea of the word)
im going to try mandrake and get rid of xp and get maybe 98 or 2000
windows is fucking terrible
if only i can learn enough linux and get to play black & white again

2004-03-20, 23:00
After being forced to stop selling Lindows in The Netherlands earlier in the week, Lindows CEO Michael Robertson is now asking his users to come up with a possible temporary name that could be used in order to satisfy the courts.

In his latest 'Michael's Minutes', Robertson goes on to say "We're looking for a strategy which would allow us to continue to operate in impacted countries. This may mean that Lindows needs a temporary alternative name in isolated locations. It's tremendously disruptive to a business to change a name or add an alias, but it may be the only way in the short-term that we can operate in certain places."

2004-03-21, 04:42
are windows complaining that the name is too close?
here lets smash windows
they stole their name from something in everybody's house!!!
fuck them right in the ass
NO to computer patents!!!!!

2004-03-21, 08:41
How about Lindow$ for a name?

Actually Microsoft has no right to its "windows" trademark, because windowing and windows was a well-known generic term used to describe a common type of graphical user interface.

2004-03-21, 09:26
right E
i think they need to be taken down

2004-03-26, 00:24
Lindows filed a countersuit against Microsoft and their "Windows" trademark. I hope they win the case and Microsoft loses its Windows trademark. That would make me pretty happy. Here is an article from today about it in The Register:

2004-03-26, 15:28
maybe we could push on for a watered down version
non bloatware
it would be awesome to be free one day
ill write a good one one day if they dont

2004-03-26, 23:53
maybe we could push on for a watered down version
non bloatware
Maybe Microsoft will merge with SCO and offer some kind of proprietary software similar to Unix, that will be more attractive to folks than the regular Microsoft products. The two of them are already working together in trying to defeat their common enemy, Linux.

2004-04-16, 23:47
They've changed their name from "Lindows" to "Linspire".

2004-04-17, 15:55
Downloaded Slackware Live-CD from torrents some weeks ago.
An Operating System running from your cd-rom sounded funny enough
for me to try it.

When i got the cd-rom to boot it was actually a nice experience.

30 min later i was installing Slackware 9.1 (also downed from suprnova.com)
The installation was not really easy but i got 2 PC's side by side and i could
read step-by-step instructions from the other screen how to go about.
Im new about Linux but i know something about DOS so the command prompt
was not a shock to me. (the commands are, lol)
Been playing around with it now for sometime and it works pretty much OK.
I got dual boot installation, so i can boot to Xp or Linux-Slack.
Linux has only 5GB space on the HD as im just playing around with it,
hell, i even might uninstall Slack and try some other Distros while im at it...

It is a diffrent system than Windows XP what im mostly using, but if
one wants to get freaky about OS's, Linux is a way to go, the amount of
control about how exactly the Box (pc) is set up is tremendous.

However, it also requires tremendous amount of studying, manuals and forums
etc. to get that control. But thats the way on anything if you want to really learn it.

I didnt have no special reason why to get Slackware, heard it somewhere someone
recomending it and i thought to give it a go.
There is many different Distros about, RedHat, Mandrake but all of them have
good and bad sides, or so i've heard. I've heard good words about Debian,
but i dont know how it runs as im running my first linux.

Its all about learning.
So, if one is about to try Linux, i would ask first:
Are you into reading a lot?
Because thats what im still doing...

Sure, it might be easier than ever to install but it is so much different from
Windows Xp and the likes that some learning is needed to be able to
use the box. It is not impossible to learn, im no brainiac and i got it running
and it does the things i want it to.


2004-04-17, 17:08
I believe that Windows will have an advantage for desktop users over Linux because of its ease to use. Something like Lindows could be the key to making Linux popular with desktop users, but the problem with Lindows is that they geared it towards the usage of the CNR Wharehouse when a person wants to install additional programs. That way they continue to get money from users who want extra programs. All the stuff they sell at the CNR Wharehouse is just open source material that they are selling to you, so it's wrong what they are doing.

I'm pretty good with computers, but I find that Lindows is needlessly difficult and lacking in certain programs. I don't like having to go into the Console to install programs. I should be able to click on something with my mouse and install programs with ease. Lindows could improve their design by putting some kind of installer program in it, so I could have it extract and install downloaded programs using it. The Click-N-Run program that it comes with only works with downloaded programs from the Lindows wharehouse, but if it were also modified to handle programs like the tarballs that I downloaded from openoffice.org, then that would be a great feature. I believe Lindows willfully chose to leave such functionality out because they want people to buy from the CNR Wharehouse. The other day I put a DVD into the laptop and I was directed to a Lindows CNR page which wanted me to pay $5 to get a DVD player. So I instead tried to download xine (http://xinehq.de/) and kaffeine (http://kaffeine.sourceforge.net/) but had trouble installing them. I put off the troubleshooting for later.

If the Linux community wants to end Microsoft's popular dominance, then it needs to be willing to support an operating system that has popular appeal by being easy to use, rather than elite and needlessly difficult.

2004-04-17, 18:29
And to add to and clarify my comments made in the last post, I don't think the Linux community has failed and that they need to dumb down their software. The elite version of Linux and the popular "dumbed down" version like Lindows can peacefully coexist. Rather what I would like to see is Lindows set aside their greed and increase the functionality of their program.

If I was installing an operating system for a computer novice and had the choice between the pirated copy of XP I have or the copy of Lindows, I would choose Windows because it has more functionality and universality, and is easier to use. More programs are geared towards Windows anyways. The people who would benefit from Lindows would be governments and organizations, who aren't allowed to use pirated software, and who use their computers for limited tasks.

2004-07-20, 12:40
The latest news on the fight over the Lindows name has taken a new turn. A while back the Linspire company countersued Microsoft over their usage of the name "Windows" and Microsoft actually feared they would win so they settled with Linspire for $20 million to buy the "Lindows" trademark name, which Microsoft will now own. You can read the article here (http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/20040719-4006.html). I am disappointed that Linspire took the $20 million and dropped its suit, as I would have liked to see Microsoft lose its "Windows" trademark.

2004-07-23, 12:39
I've run out of patience with Linspire. Due to the difficulty of usage of it I've decided to format the hard drive and install Windows XP. I would say that Linspire was maybe as good as Windows 95 for its quality and ease of use. The final straw for me was when I went to show some digital pictures to my wife who is bedridden and sick right now. So I took the laptop over to her and inserted the CD with jpeg files on it but I couldn't even get them to open on the computer.

For a while I was thinking it was okay to spend money on Linspire because they were in the process of fighting Microsoft, so I figured that it was going towards a good cause. Since they have settled I have lost enthusiasm for the company. Now that Microsoft owns the Lindows trademark, they may just continue selling Lindows themselves, as Microsoft Windows which runs on Linux.

I can tell just by looking at Linspire's CEO Michael Robertson's picture (http://www.linuxworld.com/story/res/33900/Michael-Robertson.jpg) that he is not much of a fighter. He'll just have to bend over and take it in the ass from the big gorilla at Microsoft, Steve Ballmer. Click here (http://www.p2pjihad.org/eclectica/dancemonkeyboy.avi) to download a 6 MB avi clip of the triumphant dance of the corporate gorilla.

Wouldn't you take it in the ass for $20 million?