Regarding Linux for everybody, did you see this bit of news (from WinInfo Daily UPDATE)?
Klaus ========================= * WAL-MART OFFERS LINUX-BASED COMPUTERS (contributed by Paul Thurrott, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Following its controversial move to sell PCs without Windows or any other OS, US retail superstore Wal-Mart has added several Linux-based PCs to its online store's product list. The PCs, which range in price from $300 to $600 without a monitor, use the Lindows variant of Linux and offer a choice of AMD Duron, Intel Celeron, or Intel Pentium 4 microprocessors. Wal-Mart is the first nontechnical retailer to offer Linux on branded PCs. "The price of software has priced many people out of computing," said Lindows CEO Michael Robertson. "With [Wal-Mart's offerings], you get a $300 computer, then for $99, you get unlimited [online] access for a year. Any applications that you want, you pay the one-time fee, then you download as much as you want [from the Lindows Click-N-Run online service), then it's yours forever." Wal-Mart specs the PCs with a Web browser, email application, MP3 player, audio CD player, Microsoft Office-compatible viewers, and several other applications and games. "These computer systems are a perfect low-cost alternative to computers preloaded with Microsoft Windows," a note on the company's Web site reads. For more information, visit the Microtel PCs with LindowsOS page on Wal-Mart's Web site. http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product_listing.gsp?cat=96356 > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Wayne Wilson > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 10:29 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: comparison of Linux distributions > > > > John Gage wrote: > > Yes, Dan, it's interesting! > > > > This desk-top lacuna is what I think Apple is trying to fill > and I think > > that Apple's results will ipsa loquitur. I agree that Apple's OS and > > Linux are not quite the same, but Apple has steadily moved/been pushed > > closer and closer to OS. > > > >> "To be fair, Red Hat concerns itself less with the desktop segment of > >> the market > > > Over the last few years I have found myself starting with > Red Hat, moving to Suse for a year or so, trying Caldera and > then moving to Mandrake and back to Red Hat. > Been on Red Hat since 6 something. My conclusions are the > Linux in general is ready for enterprise desktop roll-out, > i.e. with a support staff. Using it at home requires too > much of my technical support time and is way too frustrating > for non-technical computer members of the family. > > I have not found any kind of support, other than news groups > to be effective and most often I just work around and wait > for new releases. But I expect this as I don't pay for any > of these distributions any more., but even when I did, I got > no help via e-mail. > > My current caveats are as follows: > > Patching - the distro's are large and using auto-updaters > like found in Red Hat and Mandrake are essential. However, > they can often involve megabyte downloads, sometimes into > the 10's and a few times into the 100's. This simply won't > work on a dial-up line. If you want to be internet > connected, patching is essential. MY personal favorite at > the moment is Ximian's Red Carpet. > > Red Hat technical advancements - Red Hat is moving more > agressively than in the past. I have much enjoyed the new > journaling file system, have been less happy with the change > from Lilo to Grub boot loader and Red Hat's variation on GCC > has caused a few compilation errors. > > Xfree86 4.x release - has been the source of a few > problems. Default font sizes are a mystery to figure out. > Starting with RH 7.2 I was forced to switch from Gnome to > KDE to alleviate screen freezes and system lock-ups due to > Windowing events, with the upgrade to 7.3 this behavior has > been reversed and now KDE can't come back from screen saver > mode after a window alert pop's up - which my calendar > system does all the time, so it's back to Gnome. > > IF Apple were to build in some kind of auto-updating > support and provide a Linux compatibility layer, I would be > seriously tempted to switch. But honestly, I really don't > need MS office support anymore, Open Office and AbiWord are > compatible enough. The main reason for a switch to Mac OS X > would be at home, where Windows still rules the day with > applications for auto-downloading my digi-cam over USB and > Print Shop for my family to use. > > >
