Talk:Linspire/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

hasnt Microsfot sued these guys recently?

Yes. They lost. Tannin

That's probably more interesting thatn the name off their CEO -- Tarquin 18:34 Jan 11, 2003 (UTC)

Indeed. I don't know enough about Lindows to do it myself though. BTW, I should clarify - when I said "they lost" I meant Microsoft lost. This was no doubt written up on The Register and/or The Inquirer at the time: maybe a couple of months ago, or a little longer. www.theregister.co.uk and www.theinquirer.net Tannin

I found that the latest Linspire disables the RPM and Apt-Get programs. Here is how to fix them to get Linspire working like other Debian distros:

Go to /etc/apt/sources.lst and take out the comments, those "#" signs and then apt-get works as it should.

apt-get install gcc apt-get install man apt-get install mozilla

Also they crippled RPM too. /var/lib/rpm/ was missing so I created it, ran apt-get install rpm and then rpm --initdb and rpm --rebuilddb and it fixed the problem of not being able to load RPMs with Linspire. Added by: Orion Blastar OrionBlastar

Linspire helped me do stuff with GNU/Linux that I otherwise would not have been able to do. I'm a simple end user, so I really have had a bit of a hard time with SuSE Linux, which is my other distro of choice. I like SuSE well enough, and it takes lots of pounding in my law office, but there is more of a learning curve to SuSE than with Linspire. Added Christian Einfeldt, einfeldt@gmail.com on 2004/12/15


So whats the shpiel? Are these guys GPL compliant? If so where is there source code? It sounds fishy to me! Kramer

Yes, Linspire is GPL compliant. The source code can be downloaded from http://www.linspire.com/lindows_products_license.php#sou David Orban on 2005/05/25


One question/comment about Linspire running as root by default: what Linux distro doesn't run as root by default? I've installed several distros on several computers, and the only account that's created is root. It's up to the user to create additional, non-root accounts. I haven't seen the Linspire documentation, but that information should be there.

ubuntu doesn't even have root users (if you need root user privileges temporarily, you can run the command with sudo) --Limulus 23:06, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
A far more experienced Linux user informs me that indeed, ubuntu does have a root user, but there is no root user password set up, effectively making it useless (unless, of course, one knows how to set the password...) --Limulus 07:53, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
True, and it should be noted that Ubuntu does away with the same problems as Linspire by allowing to elevate privileges as necessary, and all users in the system may not even have this ability. The approach is very similar to that of Mac OS X, in which (even when logged in with an administrator-privileged account), the user has to log in again as some administrator when installing programs or updating the system. --80.221.11.149 05:26, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Michael Robertson called the legal action "Sextuple Jeopardy", which is like "Double jeopardy" but sextupled.

This line sounds kind of unprofessional, unless the whole line is Robertson's, but that's not my main complaint. Wouldn't Sextuple Jeopardy be Double Jeopardy but tripled? (Unless Robertson made that mistake too.) Azure Haights 02:57, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

a friend just bought a comp loaded with this sys. not too happy with it!

Whoever is editing the CNR link to point to their commercial site where they are selling the product... STOP IT! You should point it to the Linspire site for information direct from the source. Another thing is the addition of "apt-get" information under the heading of CNR. This does NOT belong there! You can start a new section if you want to..... but, apt-get has nothing to do with CNR and if you start to apt-get software on a Linspire system you will turn it into a "frankensystem" that is half-Debian and half-Linspire and you will most likely end up breaking things. You can use apt-get OR you can use CNR by you cannot use both of them unless you really want to hose your computer. Unknown Linspire User

CNR cost too much for me and others to afford the subscription to, in order to download F/OSS software. I mean why pay a monthly fee to have the right to download F/OSS software? I'd rather use apt-get instead. I switched from Linspire to KNOPPIX, then KANOTIX, and then Unbuntu, and now Red Hat Fedora. Linspire upset me for the last time, and spited me with the 4.0 to 5.0 upgrade in which they wanted me to pay more for the new OS to fix bugs and security flaws in 4.0 that they refused to fix. Since I was using F/OSS software via apt-get, I no longer needed Linspire. Fedora Up2Date and Synoptic work as well as Linspire CNR, only without the monthly access fees. Linspire is one of the few Linux based distros that breaks when you apply F/OSS software the normal way you are supposed to install it. OrionBlastar 14:54 Sept 28, 2005 (CDT)

It seems to me a rather troubling accusation that security flaws were not corrected in a prior release. That said, Apple did the same thing, until they were pressured into releasing the security updates for Jaguar as well as integrating them into Panther. The debate over what qualifies as a bugfix and what should be a free update is a debate --albiet IMHO an illegitamete one. If you look at Office 2003, an improved feature often meant "contains bug fixes". For example, if error reporting has been improved, doesn't that mean "works more reliably" (ie. works as intended). It still didn't fix my problems with error reporting.. but you see my point.

Could you provide evidence that security flaws went uncorrected?

--Smkatz

The Criticisms-section seemed to be in need of a workout. Debasing established and field-tested security practices as well as numerous expert opinions simply with a biased choice of words doesn't seem to constitute very good encyclopedic material. --80.221.11.149 05:16, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

The whole article looks like a commercial advertisement. As for the Criticism section, there is no word about the commertial nature of the CNR service- the main thing the Linspire opponents dislike. In the Freespire section, I was shocked these words: In August 2005, a distribution LiveCD called "Freespire" hit the web by accident. What accident? Squiggle OS however, is no longer in development. Why? What really happened between Andrew Betts and Linspire Inc.?

CNR / Ubuntu

My opinion: Do not remove the Ubuntu/CNR deal rumor from ubuntu's page. It is pertinent to Ubuntu; if you are interested in Ubuntu and did not hear this rumor, you will not find out about it if it's only on the Linspire page. It's ok to have the topic covered in both articles, or even have it mostly in Linspire with a note on the Ubuntu page briefly summarizing with a "more info" link. --AlanH 22:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Seconded. - 81.179.222.74 01:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)