Linux Format forums

RE: Re: RE: Linux desktop article

Rhakios — Wed Sep 07, 2005 10:07 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 10:07 pm

I would copy the text from this page but it's part of an image, not actual text. Still, it says pretty much what I said above, I should have made clear that I meant security updates.
I'm not against the subscription model and CNR gold works out cheaper than Mandriva Club standard, to which it is roughly comparable (very roughly).
I think I still prefer Xandros (as a Windows alternative), but I need to play with it more to make a fair assessment.

RE: Re: RE: Linux desktop article

linuxgirlie — Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:10 pm

Author: linuxgirlie

Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:10 pm

I am pretty sure from what I have read you have to pay for any files coming from CNR, I could be wrong and they may of changed this but thats what put me off the distro in the first place...

RE: Re: RE: Linux desktop article

Rhakios — Wed Sep 07, 2005 8:27 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 8:27 pm

Linspire installed very easily, the only problem was caused by me not filling in a dialog correctly for the network settings. However, bl**dy bouncing systray icon will you effing well go away! Got that turned off. It seems they want some money for click-and-run and while it says that "most" updates will be distributed for free via CNR whenever possible, whether you have a paid-for CNR account or not, the only update available was one for errm CNR. I hope you don't have to pay for CNR if you've paid for the distro.

One of the first things that pops up after installation and some registration questions is a full-screen video thing (which I closed before it got anywhere), a lot like a fresh install of Windows really. I have yet to see if Linspire's functionality matches the hype.

I will probably get round to having another look at it at the weekend.

Edit: I have refrained from commenting on some of its filesystem weirdnesses, like the swap file in /boot - well alright I have commented on it now, but I could have mentioned more

RE: Re: RE: Linux desktop article

Rhakios — Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:19 am

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:19 am

If you're getting 67K, you'll have it in no time.

I might (only might) get it installed on something tomorrow. Today has flown, gone midnight already

RE: Re: RE: Linux desktop article

nordle — Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:07 pm

Author: nordle

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:07 pm

Thanks Rhakios, a while ago I installed nearly everything from kde extragear ( http://extragear.kde.org/ ) so Im using ktorrent.

I guess it was the time, I checked that I was only connected to 8 peers! After 5 hours, around 6pm, it picked up and now I've got 106 with a 67k/sec download which is much better.

Yeah, knowing I've got a 29k/sec upstream, I've set the limit to 20k and it keeps everything going nicely this end too.

It would certainly be interesting to see some numbers put out by linspire and the end of this, its got to be thousands. It wold also be good to see how many are still being used in 2 months time

RE: Re: RE: Linux desktop article

Rhakios — Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:13 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:13 pm

As always bittorrent started slowly, but picked up after about half an hour or so. It finished in just over 4 hours.
Which client are you using? I don't know if it makes a difference, but I find Azureus very good (on the few occasions I need to use it) and with sensible defaults. I usually set my upload to just below what the line can take as that way I appear generous but don't swamp my upload bandwidth to the detriment of what I can download, but I'm sure you know all about this sort of thing so I'll stop rambling.

RE: Re: RE: Linux desktop article

nordle — Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:06 pm

Author: nordle

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:06 pm

Rhakios, how long did it take? I've been trying on/off for a couple of days, each time it would say "server too busy". Today my request went through, on http there is 800 long waiting list, droping about 1 a minute. On the torrent, Im getting between 2 and 5k a second! Its like being on dialup again
At this rate, its looking like 45hours!

Strangely Im not getting any upload speed at all, checked the firewall and the correct settings are in place, so not too sure whats going on with that...

...pause, I was getting 2-5k/sec but its stalled, its obviously a tad more popular than they probably expected. Probably the right thing to do, as they put a lot of work into 5 and were not getting a huge amount of exposure, maybe they can see the money potential in the support and third party apps so it won't be a huge loss to them as people who possibly would not have used it will now pay of the extra bits when they realise its actually pretty good.

EDIT
Im not sure this is sending out quite the right impression, after 4 hours the torrent has completed 25MB and uploaded 10MB and its been doing nothing for that last 30mins.
My HTTP queue had got down to 445, then it kindly bumped me back to 1200 for no reason I can see (it had not offered links etc).

I think I'll leave it, there was probably something somewhere stopping me from passing it on to freinds + fam anyway.

RE: Re: RE: Linux desktop article

Rhakios — Sun Sep 04, 2005 12:04 am

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 12:04 am

Bittorrent went very well, and I left it running until today to give others a chance. I expect there's no chance of getting it via http or ftp due to the huge amount of interest shown. Linspire must be doing something right, or is it a case of no-one being able to ignore a freebie?

Re: RE: Linux desktop article

nordle — Sat Sep 03, 2005 12:36 am

Author: nordle

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 12:36 am

Rhakios wrote:

Maybe, I am in the process of getting it via bittorrent. Why? Because for yet another limited time, it's free!.

What quality timing that is!! Mr Robertson must have been watching these forums

Shame that the servers have been /.'ed But definitely worth trying to download, its certainly the distro I'd recommend to a lot of those who coudln't get on with Mandriva, Suse etc.....after Slackware of course

http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/05/09/02/219238.shtml?tid=106

Re: Linux desktop article

M-Saunders — Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:35 am

Author: M-Saunders

Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:35 am

c0rd0bes wrote:

I think apple can rely on their base users to still buy the hardware whilst opening the Osx to the whole x86 vannila and all.

I doubt it -- Mac Minis may be cheap in terms of Apple hardware, but they still don't compare to what the likes of Dell and other big box-shifters can offer. For instance, you can get a full Dell PC with 2.4 GHz CPU, 512 MB RAM and a monitor for �291 inc. VAT. To get a Mac Mini with monitor and the same RAM, you're looking at nearly twice the price. Similarly, you can get Dell laptops for about �350 now. Yes, it isn't the greatest hardware quality in the world, but Macs are using pretty much the same components now, and Apple has had its fair share of reliability problems recently (eg the logic board nightmares).

Also, Apple would be expected to support a massive range of hardware, and once a load of half-assed device drivers have been written by third parties, reliability could suffer (as seen so often on Windows). Right now, Apple sells an 'appliance' where the hardware and software is well integrated -- so making it available to a trajillion combinations of PC hardware would lose that appeal.

Mike

Re: Linux desktop article

c0rd0bes — Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:10 am

Author: c0rd0bes

Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:10 am

gentlemen thank you all for your replies, I shall check out the distros mentioned here.

I guess I should make it clear I am not having a pop at the LXF mag as I have learned more about computing from LXF and linux than I ever did anywhere else. I guess its my frustration that my abilities are not as great as my expectations, and I know than whilst linux is a great OS, it could be much more.

As regards the Osx on x86 yes I agree that it is only unlegit versions that will be or are available. But surely Apple must be tempted, after all the Mac brigade are a select type; graphic designers, journos and hairdressers - just kidding , but seriously, I think apple can rely on their base users to still buy the hardware whilst opening the Osx to the whole x86 vannila and all.

I guess I am probably a tad frightened that if this ever did happen, linux on the desktop for the ordinary user would suffer for another Xyears, whilst ordinary users would be happy for a "choice" of OS, all be it proprietry.

again thank you all for your replies and advice

Re: Linux desktop article

M-Saunders — Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:58 am

Author: M-Saunders

Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:58 am

c0rd0bes wrote:

OSx will be available for x86 and will be gunning for Microsoft's share of the OS market.

It won't be available for generic x86 boxes -- it'll be available for Apple Macs. In that sense, I don't see how (as many people have suggested) it'll suddenly become a much bigger competitor to Windows. For consumers, it'll be absolutely no different -- to run OS X, you'll have to go out and buy a Mac. It'll just be a different CPU architecture inside (which is of no interest to most buyers).

If OS X was released for generic x86 machines, then it could make a difference, although that'd impact Apple's hardware sales. Essentially, to the average user, the only difference Apple's Intel switch makes is slightly faster machines, possibly at a slightly lower price.

And even if someone successfully hacks the first full OS X/x86 release to run on vanilla hardware (could be difficult depending on the amount of custom bits 'n bobs in the box), that won't suddenly threaten Microsoft either. Aunt Meg, if she even knows what OS X is, won't mess around on warez sites trying to find .torrents of hax0red OS X ISOs to burn to DVD.

Mike

RE: Linux desktop article

Rhakios — Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:37 am

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:37 am

Maybe, I am in the process of getting it via bittorrent. Why? Because for yet another limited time, it's free!.

RE: Linux desktop article

nordle — Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:56 pm

Author: nordle

Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:56 pm

If your gran needs a linux rig, you can't really get simpler or more integrated than linspire which, aside from the extra charges which are not essential, its pretty spot on, so easy to use its rediculous.

RE: Linux desktop article

A-Wing — Thu Sep 01, 2005 6:10 pm

Author: A-Wing

Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 6:10 pm

Ubuntu might be a good one to try then, I use it for the simple reason I don't have to configure it, and anything missing is in synaptic.