No announcement yet.

The Latest Distro Trying For Commercial Success Uses Arch & Wayland

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    I would love any cheap GNUbook

    It is Chrome OS with almost no GNU packages except for the Linux kernel and a little bit more the actua lLinux desktop that is being sold.

    I would love ANY GNUbook offer, with more or less the same hardware and CHEAP PRICE, with ethernet port 4 to 8 Gb of RAM and a 300 to 500 Gb HDD or even GNUtablet with perhaps a pocket USB keyboard and dual boot with Android.

    Unfortunately Ubuntu decided to go with MIR and instead of being preinstalled at this devices now, they are still developing, i hope for good they will not come as late as having no chance.

    But not any other distribution or desktop environment (except for the late Vivaldi project) is working to become a MASSIVE PRE INSTALLED one, and I think KDE books would work, even KDE tablets, at least at this 200 USD cheap Intel SoC x86_64 machines, and there are no images for them (except for a incomplete gnome fedora one)

    Linux desktop PRE INSTALLED lacks MARKETING, even if it is FREE. there are no "adverticing videos" with what it does:
    GAMING, short emulator, DOSBOX, wine and even STEAM streamed to cheap GNUbooks with USB to ethernet dongle would sell thousends of them
    OFFICE Libre Office ot even using online MS Office, other with some use of Scribus, Latex and Inkscape, Kraft and others and some voice that tells you TONS OF FREE SOFTWARE, exactly 1.352.235 (invented now) packages at AUR.

    I visited their spreadsheet and let there some ideas, I will not fund it, but I would love any other pre installed GNU/Linux distro as Ubuntu ,eve nbetter if it is an AUR based one, Antergos or Manjaro are my favorites, but both lack this I WANT TO BE PRE INSTALED mantra and They do not want to work in a DELTA repository as this OSU distro has as first TO DO.


    • #52
      Originally posted by dee. View Post
      What the actual fuck?

      If you want an OS that panders to corporate interests and sells out its users while doing it, why not just use Windows? What good is it to have a popular Linux Desktop OS if it turns out to be just as shitty as windows? Just to be able to say "look, Linux is popular now"? Pointless...
      I agree 100% dee, who cares if you're popular, OSX is a great UNIX certified platform for people who don't care about 'free'. The only reason the public 'doesn't care' about 'free' is because they don't realize it's benefits intrinsically. Free Software is disruptive, and disruption is often painful, not to mention all those moneyed interests that fight against change. So I understand why the public feels this way, they've never been shown why they should care... except from guys like stallman.

      I agree a system must be pragmatic, and that means it must be usefull, but we do that now without removing what defines Linux. You ever seen QNX, it's awesome, has a genius architecture years ahead... but it's not Free Software, it doesn't benefit a community. Permissive benefits the developers, improves the quality of software, and can often benefits the corporations... but it hurts the community. This is the trade-off we are forced to make, you can never get the benefits of 'Free Software' without the sacrifices, this is why permissive software only truly thrives with moneyed supporters. The beauty of GPL, is that we're able to form an organic community that survives without undue corporate influence. You can get corporate support without influence, but you cannot avoid that influence if you depend on corporate support to exist.
      Last edited by techzilla; 22 July 2014, 02:24 PM.


      • #53
        I would love to see Canonical release some laptop competitors to Chrome OS (low end), Windows (mid) and a competitor to OS X (high). Or at least go through hardware partners for those. As in a 3 level product system. I know that the '3 options' strategy is one of the more successful ones out there. Ubuntu has spearheaded the mainstream market before, and I'm confident that they are the ones that will do it again. They went pretty far in their crowdfunding campaign just with their Ubuntu Edge phone!


        • #54
          Originally posted by Danny3 View Post
          Arch + Wayland + MATE sounds good.
          I would pay for a Linux distribution that can compete with Windows.
          I would pay for Windows if it could compete with Linux.


          • #55
            Originally posted by techzilla View Post
            The only reason the public 'doesn't care' about 'free' is because they don't realize it's benefits intrinsically. Free Software is disruptive, and disruption is often painful, not to mention all those moneyed interests that fight against change.
            yes, disruption in itself is a problem - people don't want disruption, especially when the costs associated with it outweigh the benefits (better workflow, more productivity)
            you have to remember that the computer is a tool that man made to solve problems and that became ubiquitous for its ability to make life easier, not the opposite...
            there's only a few people who appreciate technology in and of itself (and even more so if it is complicated and hard to use, and or the bearer of "superior" ideology making the user feel oh so 1337 or on a higher moral ground), the rest will just want to get on with their lives with techology helping them (socialize) while staying as little in the way as possible

            OTOH, the only way to be assuredly devoid of "moneyed interests" is for a platform to be a hackfest/hobbyist/grassroots one (as linux was in the very beginning)..
            but you can hardly have a "grassroots" platform which is also mainstream, since going mainstrem implies several things that clash with the grassroot mentality
            So I understand why the public feels this way, they've never been shown why they should care... except from guys like stallman.
            it's not that they havent been shown, rather the reason why you think they should care doesnt actually mean much to most people or application domains...
            being "open", "not slave to corporate interests" and stuff, may be relevant, but hardly a selling point when refinement and functionality are of the most concern
            also, sometimes the very fact of having a "community" behind can actually be a turnoff, if (as it happens with several people in the real world) one wants the maker of tools one uses, to be concretely liable for them - it gives a sense of reassurement that a community backed tool doesnt give but is of utmost importance to many

            Originally posted by mitcoes
            Linux desktop PRE INSTALLED lacks MARKETING
            linux desktop preinstalled lacks DEALS
            one has to remember that well before windows, microsoft already had a foothold on the PC platform, with DOS
            after IBM adopted DOS (by virtue of bill gates' deal with ibm), everyone else rushed to preinstall DOS (DR's if not MS) to be compatible with IBM's platform
            hadnt they done so, they wouldnt have been able to run professional applications (which all targeted the PC (thus, DOS) due to the PC XT / AT being the reference platform despite their dull technology, in turn due to IBM being the encumbent professional ("business") hardware vendor) thus, they'd have been cut out of the market..

            for an OS to be preinstalled:
            1) it either has to be your (the HW manufacturer's) OS, or
            2) there has to be a deal involving doing so, or
            3) it has to be an "industry standard", backed by a consortium - or a strong company, creating incentive for others to follow

            for OSX and iOS it's the first, for nokia's Lumia it used to be the second, for DOS it was a combination of the second and the third, for windows it's the third (and to a certain extent, a matter of continuity)

            for desktop Linux to be widely preinstalled it would need most if not all makers of industry recognized applications, to target it, AND a first tier hw vendor to preinstall it - others would follow suit then..
            but for the former to happen, it would need to itself be a unified and consistent platform to develop for, first, which it isnt) and the latter is hardly a possibility if there's hardly an "IBM" in the desktop pc field anymore and the market is now made of HP, Acer, Asus,... notebooks (all the more ACPI' ed and integrated with custom hw, fw blobs and closed bios..) and noname boxes...

            , even if it is FREE.
            as some one once said, "sea water is also free... no one thirsty drink it though"

            there are no "adverticing videos" with what it does:
            stuff that you can very well (if not better) do on windows, in some cases with the very same ported sw - with that kind of advertising you'd obtain little more besides promoting dosbox itself...