In response to Indiana's recent conversion of 22,000 students from Windows-based desktops to Linux, columnist Ed Moltzen decided "to put Linux to the test with the two most demanding public school students I know," his children.
So what were the results after he setup Xandros on the laptop for his son and daughter? This conversation with his son says it best,
So Dad," he asked. "What is the difference between Linux and Windows?" I tried to explain but it was a waste of breath. "What difference do you see?" I asked back.
"Nothing, really."
Yeah, well, there is little difference!
Xandros? Argh. That's a disappointment. Considering how it's licensed, it really is not that much different from the close-source, proprietary world of Windows.
Why the heck didn't they choose Ubuntu?
Check out Barton's gaming blog at Armchair Arcade.
licensing?
I'm not sure what you mean about Xandros. I know it includes some non-GPL stuff (Flash, Adobe Reader, etc.), but most users want those types of apps anyway.
Meanwhile, the answer to your question is in the referenced story:
-----
Charlie | cyberdash
Licensing
Well, of course I didn't RTFA, cel4145, you know that!
However, here's some info about Xandros Licensing.
Note:
That hardly sounds like "free" software to me! I particularly like this part:
No problem! I'll just stick to my cracked copy of XP for now. Geez, wish Santa would bring me the legit version in his bag. The only Christmas cards I get are from credit card companies. Ah, the cheer.
Check out Barton's gaming blog at Armchair Arcade.
like I said
Probably the reason for that is that they are providing Flash, Adobe Reader, and other non-free software apps that a large percentage of Linux users end up installing on their own. It may be the Nvidia drivers, which are not open source. Many Ubuntu users some script like Automatix to add in all kinds of non-GPL stuff. Do you use anything like that?
-----
Charlie | cyberdash
Restrictions
My understanding was that the limitations were much more fundamental, not just a matter of a few non-free programs thrown into the mix. See the Criticisms section of the wikipedia article.
My impression is that it's restricted to the point where you're not allowed to make copies and distribute them yourself.
Check out Barton's gaming blog at Armchair Arcade.
not allowed to make copies
Well, if there are any non-free programs in the distribution that do not allow making copies, that would be the case. But one could distribute the other parts. People use free and non-free together all the time.
However, my reading of the criticism I just read is that the free software idealists are upset because Xandros has not contributed back as open source some of the software they are developing.
-----
Charlie | cyberdash
GPL
Well, that would break the GPL, wouldn't it? What's the point of a viral license if the profit-mongers won't play fair?
I'd strongly discourage folks from bothering with Xandros OS. For Pete's sake, if you're concerned enough about escalating software costs, just go with Ubuntu instead. It's free in both senses of the word. I hardly think that mimicking the "look and feel" of Windows is a point in anyone's favor. If you're going to mimic something, why not OS X? Or Amiga Workbench? Or GEOS? Or heck, GEM. Hell, anything but Windows.
Check out Barton's gaming blog at Armchair Arcade.
Does it?
Does it? Obviously, it doesn't for the source code. Once you download the iso and burn it to CD, you'd be able to redistribute any of the GPL-licensed stuff per the software license. As for the binaries, typically the packages are separately accessible in some way (although I do not have any experience working with Xandros, so I can't speak for sure about their implementation). As long as one can redistribute the binaries for the GPL'd apps, it wouldn't be a violation.
Anyway, don't go the moral high and mighty road, Mr. MS Office fan. One of the largest problems with "escalating software costs" is Microsoft. One can't complain about the evils of greenhouse gas emissions and our dependency on foreign oil, champion hybrid vehicles and alternative fuels, and then mercilessly condemn the actions of others while owning and constantly driving a Chevy Tahoe ;-) The fossil fuel dependency is a good analogy, I think, if we see Xandros as a large move away from proprietary software dependency with some pragmatic compromises in that regard which, in the long run, has many more benefits than detriments. Ubuntu or Red Hat might be better idealistically, but getting people to shift over from Windows and MS dependency doesn't mean that we shouldn't recognize that people have certain software literacies that emulating Windows helps with the transition to Linux. For instance, Moltzen states in the article that the reason he chose Xandros had to do with wireless driver support. Many people don't have the expertise or don't want to invest the time in trying to get alternative Linux hardware drivers to work--it isn't easy, after all.
Besides, why emulate OS X? IMHO, it's just not any better than Windows, much less the end all to beat all that Mac lovers describe it as. I just gave back an expensive dual G5 PowerMac in favor of a less expensive Intel-based PC because the Mac is definitely not more desirable (not very good for accessibility issues, for that matter).
Also, you know I have to dig on your MS Office addiction with the hopes that one day we'll get you going to those MS Office Anonymous meetings, and six months to a year later you'll recognize how much better life has become :-)
-----
Charlie | cyberdash