Lindows.com, which tries to make the Linux operating system more consumer-friendly, has introduced a version of the OS that runs directly from a CD-ROM, for $30 USD.
Lindows Offers Easier-to-Install Linux
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Why would someone PAY for a live evaluation CD? This is stupid…
I was about to say that
No way. I’ll happily pirate it though.
If it doesn’t have an option to install to Hard drive as well you’d have to be a moron to pay for it.
Instead of pirating, you could just use knoppix. Same thing, except free!
Linux from a CD without installing to the hard disk? Micheal Robertson is a genius! Who would have thunk?
– J
I’ve never used Lindows or even seen it running, but from what I’ve read it sounds like a really good distribution for new users.
I wouldn’t buy this CD myself, but if I was in the line of work where I was trying to sell customers on Linux, I would probably buy one of these CDs just to carry around for demonstration purposes. It could be a good sales tool if you’re in to that sort of thing.
As much as I like Knoppix, it would not fit the bill in this instance, I think.
I agree with the live cd comments. You’d think that Michael Robertson would be handing them out like candy. If you cannot install it to the hard drive… then use it to showcase your offering. (business sense????)
I give out KNOPPIX CD’s like candy. I’ve managed to corrupt almost all of my Windows counter-parts here at work that way 😉
I’ve also decided to hand them out at our local LUG meetings, once we start (hopefully next month).
Yep, KNOPPIX is a darned good evaluation distro. I’ll carry a CD with me next time I decide to buy a new PC. I want to be able to test it and it’s components for Linux compatibility BEFORE I buy it. If the sales people won’t let me do a test run with the KNOPPIX CD, I’ll go somewhere that will.
Don’t sell it for $29.00, drop it from planes! Mail it to everyone in the world ala AOL with it’s defaults all pointing to the Lindows homepage to purchase the full version!
How did this guy ever get the capital to start this company?
Lindows is on a road to nowhere.
i fully agree with the live cd comments. so now instead of trying it legally, i’m just going to try and find a pirated copy to try. whatever. i buy things that i like, but not without trying them first, or at least experiencing them first hand.
he should be dropping this from planes….dummy.
More and more it seems like Robertson just wants Lindows (the company) to be Microsoft. I’ve recently seen that the click and run thingy is selling (yes, selling) Xine instead of offering it free to existing click and run subscribers. I don’t get it!
…it was called Mandrake and went bankrupt, remember?
There’s a lot more to having a successful company than technology (MS and AOL have proven this time and time again). For as smart as the egg heads here like to think they are, they sure haven’t learned anything from history.
It’s the MARKETING STUPID!
Telling Joe Consumer to “download the Knopix .iso, burn a CD, and try Linux without Real Audio, Flash, Java, etc.” is NOT the way to win him over. He’ll just look at you funny and ask, “What’s an iso?”
All the “geniuses” would scratch their heads and scoff at MS and AOL, while the rest of the world lined MS and AOL’s pockets with BILLIONS in revenues. It would look like Michael Robertson is the REAL genius here.
Zoe
Lindows.com sells Xine for $4.95 because it includes a LICENSED DVD decoder. Gee, respecing and paying for licensing, novel concept to the Linux crowd. I personally am glad that there’s a place to BUY a LICENSED DVD player that actually works.
Z
Mandrake = Bankrupt
Lindows = Selling like hot cakes (according to reports made public by WalMart)
Who’s the “dummy?”
Z
I did.
I’m not knocking Mandrake’s product, I’m talking about their total lack of business sense. You can’t pay employees when you give your stuff away for free. DUH! This is Business 101. Revenues – Expenses = Profits. When you have no revenues, you can’t have expenses for very long before you go BK.
FYI Mandrake did not go bankrupt, it entered what is known in french as “cessation de paiements,” which is similar (but not identical) to filing a Chapter 11 in the states. And, contrary to what you’re saying, this was not the result of their distro being dowloadable for free, but rather of bad business decisions made by hired “experts,” mainly trying to get into the educational software business. Mandrake, presently under govt. oversight, is actually doing quite well (Mandrake 9.1. is a good sell, apparently) and should come out of its current state and back into financial health soon.
Again, giving away a free distro was not the problem. They sold enough boxed copy (I personally bought two) and got enough MandrakeClub subscriptions to cover their costs – however, they had crippling outstanding debts from their disastrous foray into educational software. So in fact their financial problems had nothing to do with the fact that they made their distro available for free.
Gee, respecing and paying for licensing, novel concept to the Linux crowd.
Please, could you be more condescending? I don’t feel insulted enough.
Seriously, the Linux community is very respectful of licensing. The GNU General Public License is proof of that, and Linux users are less likely to pirate software than their Windows counterpart because a great deal of Linux programs are available for free or for little money. And many Linux users contribute directly to Open Source projects they like. I must have spent about 500$ last year on Linux projects and products.
Enough with the FUD.
Seriously, the Linux community is very respectful of licensing.
So why did so many people question Redhat for not including an MP3 player?
Right…
All the “geniuses” would scratch their heads and scoff at MS and AOL, while the rest of the world lined MS and AOL’s pockets with BILLIONS in revenues. It would look like Michael Robertson is the REAL genius here.
Hey, if he actually manages to get people to BUY a DEMO CD, then he deserves the nobel prize for audacity.
This is irrelevant. The fact that people question RedHat’s decision has nothing to do with whether they respect licenses or not. In any case, Mandrake includes a .mp3 player, and as far as I know they are not in trouble with the owners of the mp3 format.
The fact is, Linux users are so respectful of licenses that most of them are now switching to .ogg files instead of mp3s, because mp3 is not an open format.
The expression ‘There is a sucker born every minute” works very well indeed!
This is just sad… $30 for this thing??
Lindows isn’t even that great. It’s just KDE ontop of Debian. I tried it for a while last year and couldn’t stand it. I’m much happier with Gnome on Mandrake.
And why would anyone buy such a thing when you can get knoppix for free?
They should make up a live “demo” CD and just give it away, that way people will be able to try their product before they shell out the $100 to buy it.
If the $30 live cd had the Proto-type AOL client with it. From a business standpoint, I’d never use them. But, at home, AOL has a great selection of legal music and videos worth the extra $10 a month. And a linux client would fly off the shelves if it could actually act as an AOL router for all the PS2, Xbox, etc that Windows AOL refuses to work with “legally”.
He’s really missing the mark–and that is all the 200-700MHz machines running WinDog98 and polluting the ‘net. Something quick, cheap, and easy to use that wouldn’t thrash PCs would really sell to people that just want to “work” with their PC. If it was bubbley and shiny too it just might sell. Of course Click-n-Run will never work for the Win98 replacements, but perhaps a “magazine” type model could work. Publish a Linux Mag every 6 months with a new shiny CD. You’d pay say $20-$30 for the mag and a full install. If you are upgrading, you’d get your pick of say $30 of click-n-run stock. And articles, websites, tutorials on the CD to help you get more use out of it!
but do you honestly think that people will actually pay for it after trying it?
i personally havnt tried it so i cant comment, but as it stands i wont pay for something that i feel that i can download for free with any other distro.
now on the other hand if i could try out lindows, and perhaps realise that it is exaclty what someone like my mother was looking for, and did actually offer something differnt from other distro’s and freely downloaded software i would purchase it
“”Seriously, the Linux community is very respectful of licensing. The GNU General Public License is proof of that, and Linux users are less likely to pirate software than their Windows counterpart because a great deal of Linux programs are available for free or for little money. And many Linux users contribute directly to Open Source projects they like. I must have spent about 500$ last year on Linux projects and products.
Enough with the FUD.”” – Archiesteel
Gimme a break. I give exactly the same credit to Linux users for respecting licenses as I give to Windows users. There’s lots of people in the Windows world that buy software instead of using pirated copies, just as there are on Linux. The reason piracy seems more prevalent on Windows is a) There are more windows users b) There is more commercial software. When Linux finally starts to see a large amount of commercial software we’ll also start to see levels of piracy approaching that of Windows, if not more due to the “You mean it’s not free?” mentality prevalent in a section of the Linux community. If someone buys their software on Windows they’ll buy it on Linux, if they use pirate software on Windows they’ll use pirate software on Linux.
In short, Linux users are no more or less respectful of licenses that their Windows counterparts, they simply have less opportunity to break them. Any amount of holier than thou commentary from whichever section of the Linux community you represent will not change that.
As soon i got a email from Mr Robert aka lindows frame maker, i saw live cd wow, can i download it , damm the dream was broken……….30 bucks…..i better spend them on my girlfriend…….;)
Don’t sell it for $29.00, drop it from planes! Mail it to everyone in the world ala AOL with it’s defaults all pointing to the Lindows homepage to purchase the full version!
I guess they want to make you pay for it for the risk. Yes, the risk of dumping the CD on your hard disk and running that version instead of purchasing the full version. I’m sure that there’s some licenced stuff on this live CD and they *know* that people could do that. Sure, Grandma Thelma don’t know how to do this, but her pimply-faced grandchild can.
Btw, AOL makes money with the services they’re providing, not on the software. I’m not sure if it’s the same with Lindows. That’s why they have to sell their stuff.
“The reason piracy seems more prevalent on Windows”
Piracy is more prevalent on Windows, any way you try to rationalize it.
“When Linux finally starts to see a large amount of commercial software we’ll also start to see levels of piracy approaching that of Windows,”
This is an pretty assumption, based on a hypothetical situation that is, in the end, unlikely. There will certainly be more commercial apps for Linux in the future, but there’s no reason it should reach the same proportion as in the Windows world, considering the large number of quality free (both as in beer and in speech) applications available for Linux. Linux becoming more prevalent entails the software business model evolving.
“if not more due to the “You mean it’s not free?” mentality prevalent in a section of the Linux community.”
However, the proportion of that “section of the Linux community” itself will not grow if Linux becomes more prevalent, as it represents a “core group” that is already “converted”, if you will. In any case, it is a pretty small section to begin with. I, like many others, use Linux because it is good and free (as in speech), not because it is free (as in beer).
“In short, Linux users are no more or less respectful of licenses that their Windows counterparts”
Actually, they are. In absolute terms, there is much less piracy in the Linux community than in the Windows community, any way you cut it. You are making the assumption that if the current situation were to change dramatically things might be different. It’s your right to state such an opinion, but that’s all it is: an opinion.
“Any amount of holier than thou commentary from whichever section of the Linux community you represent will not change that.”
My, aren’t we condescending today. I represent a very special section of the Linux community: me. Now, who do you represent? (I’ve got a few ideas of my own, but I wouldn’t want to be moderated down…)
I wish people would back their claims that “X platform has more pirates than Y platform” with SOME kind of evidence…
Yeah, sorry about that last paragraph, need to switch to decaf :>
I’d say that as a percentage of the total userbase then even NOW there are more broken licenses in the Linux world than in the Windows world.
How about mp3? Any distro that doesn’t license it can release the distro without this support secure in the knowledge that 5 minutes after installing the distro the average Linux user will have also installed a 3rd party mp3 plugin without a license.
DVD? Same story, there’s enough deCSS sources running wild you can download it anywhere.
GIF? How many people DIDN’T download the plugin for GIMP irrespective of whether the Unisys LZW patent was still valid in their country (Good news for the US btw, that patent ran out last month, you can have all the gif support you want legally).
I might not like those things needing licenses, but their licenses are casually broken every day by thousands of Linux users.
Sharing of pirated music/video/apps takes place on just as regular a basis as on any windows machine. Heck, with it’s reputation as a good server OS Linux is probably hosting the machine they’re stored on. WineX, well there’s another wonderful reason to download a few pirated windows games, and no doubt it’s being done.
Yes, you don’t hear headlines about piracy on Linux, but that’s because losing a few hundred dollars to piracy on Linux is nothing compared to losing a few hundred thousand on Windows.
I stand by my original point, it’s the immense Windows userbase that makes it appear that there is more piracy. I’d imagine that if a study was done on how many do/don’t use pirated software you’d see the percentages come out roughly even.
Slightly off-topic, but some might find this interesting. A friend of mine who has recently returned from Malaysia and Thailand reported that pirated Lindows and Xandros CDs are now widely sold on streets and some software shops in those countries – alongside pirated WindowsXP and other Windows software. In many cases, the friend observed, this is true for otherwise decent looking shops, where one would not expect to find pirated software.
How about mp3? Any distro that doesn’t license it can release the distro without this support secure in the knowledge that 5 minutes after installing the distro the average Linux user will have also installed a 3rd party mp3 plugin without a license.
I’m not sure you need a licence for decoding MP3s. For encoding, yes, definitely, and that’s why I use Ogg Vorbis. However, for decoding… I’m not sure. There are many free MP3 players out there (even on Windows) and they didn’t had to get a licence from Thomson or Fraunhaufer(sp?).
DVD? Same story, there’s enough deCSS sources running wild you can download it anywhere.
It’s theorically illegal under the US DMCA… but not everywhere in the world. Anyway, it’s still not clear if decoding your own DVDs can be classified as “fair use”. The guy that wrote DeCSS wasn’t put in jail AFAIK.
GIF? How many people DIDN’T download the plugin for GIMP irrespective of whether the Unisys LZW patent was still valid in their country (Good news for the US btw, that patent ran out last month, you can have all the gif support you want legally).
Again, I think it depend if you open or write GIFs. I’m no lawyer though.
some of you guys earlier missed the point…others got it though.
they should give the live cd for free…charge for the real product. i have no problem with them charging for their stuff…but not for a demo cd….unless that demo cd came with a coupon for $30 off the full distro.
You don’t have to spend 30.00. For 4.95 per month you can get the following:
Lindows 4.0 Installation
Lindows 4.0 Live CD
Lindows Click and Run CD
Access to Click and Run
I think it’s a great value. I spent 4.95 to get all three CD’s and the opportunity to test out Lindows and their Click and Run feature. You can get there by starting here:
https://shop.lindows.com/loginform.php
MP3:
“”I have my own/third party mp3 software. Do I need a license?
Yes. Use of our patents is not related to a specific implementation of encoders and decoders, which means that a license under our patents is needed. “” — http://mp3licensing.com/help/developer.html
The vast majority of open source MP3 players, and those that use portions of the format in mpeg1/II video are doing so with disregard to the patent license.
deCSS:
“”According to most sources, it used a DVD player key recovered from the object code of the Xing software-based DVD player program.”” – http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/dvd-discuss-faq.html#ss1.2…
Hearsay evidence I admit, but that’s not an isolated reference to the mechanism used to break CSS. Now being able to decrypt something you’ve paid for so that you can watch it is something IMO you should be allowed to do (And yes, the guy got off, which I’m happy about). Nevertheless if the deCSS program is founded on information ripped from a commercial DVD player then that in itself is a breach of licensing by reverse engineering the binary, and taints the entire project.
GIF:
http://www.unisys.com/about__unisys/lzw/
I know it doesn’t actually give the full details on here, but the bare essentials are that you need a Unisys license to create gifs (Not display AFAIK). You also need to be able to prove that any gifs displayed on a web site have come from a licensed source, or have a separate license for your site.
Ok, so I’m being pedantic, but I do have a point here. I think if we looked hard enough we’d find that ALL of us have at least one piece of software that breaches licensing somewhere on our desktops independent of the OS we’re running (Servers can be untainted due to the nature of the apps they’re running). Just because it’s humdrum, everyday license violation doesn’t make it less illegal. Thanks to MS (Never thought I’d write those words :>) the windows desktop has pretty much all the licenses paid for in bundled software. Linux isn’t as virginal and pure as Archie Steel was making out because there’s no central agency paying for these licenses to make it all nice and legal.
I was under the impression that linux distributions aren’t doing anything illegal in shipping an MP3 decoder? (I might be reading it wrong though). This statement was posted on XMMS.org late last year:
—
In a posting appearing Tuesday August 27, 2002 on the Web site ‘slashdot.org,’ an individual cited a change in the mp3 license fee structure of Thomson and Fraunhofer. The writer of the post apparently misread the mp3 licensing conditions, as Thomson’s mp3 licensing policy has not experienced any change.
To clarify, since the beginning of our mp3 licensing program in 1995, Thomson has never charged a per unit royalty for freely distributed software decoders. For commercially sold decoders – primarily hardware mp3 players – the per-unit royalty has always been in place since the beginning of the program.
Therefore, there is no change in our licensing policy and we continue to believe that the royalty fees of .75 cents per mp3 player (on average selling over $200 dollars) has no measurable impact on the consumer experience.
Stefan Geyersberger
Business Manager – Audio & Multimedia
Thomson Multimedia
I stand by my original point, it’s the immense Windows userbase that makes it appear that there is more piracy.
Yes I understand your point. And I respect your opinion – but really who fscking cares about the licenses on .mp3 and .gif? Leave the caring to those who hold the actual licenses – if they seriously intend on having everyone pay the license fees, then they can release a statment asking so…of course everyone would then drop these file types to take other ones (open standard ones, presumably).
You see, why I’m ambivalent on some aspects of software licensing — I’m not against proprietary software, heck, I help produce proprietary software professionally as a game designer) — I do think proprietary file formats are inherently wrong. File formats should be open, if only to avoid a dominant player effectively locking out the competition, as is the case with MS and Office (hey, I even use a (bought!) copy of MS Office on my Linux laptop, because I need to be 100% compatible with work I bring home).
DVD is another matter entirely, very political. That’s a different debate, one that is still playing out. Let me just say that I don’t believe it’s fair to lock out open source OSes out of legally playing DVDs.
But, anyway, that’s irrelevant to the issue of piracy. And about this, the only thing we can say with nearly absolute certainty is that there is a lot more piracy now that involves Windows programs. You can make all the suppositions you want about how it would be if things were different, but that is only conjecture.
None of the Linux advocates I know encourage piracy. Playing a legally-bought or rented DVD on Linux is not piracy. Listening to legally-owned mp3s on Linux is not piracy. Making GIFs on Linux is not piracy. Don’t confuse things just to win an argument. Stop insinuating left and right that Linux users are somehow less respectful of IP than Windows users.
A little bit of intellectual honesty, please.
Agree with archie in every point.
I have impression, that majority of commenters hate Lindows is not doing very well and they try to suggest better business models. However, it’s totally up to them for what they decide to charge.
Sandman –
They’re talking about royalties there, not licenses. Just because they don’t charge a royalty doesn’t mean that they don’t require decoders (free or otherwise) to have a license. I don’t know whether they do or not, I’m just pointing it out
DoctorPepper said:
“Yep, KNOPPIX is a darned good evaluation distro. I’ll carry a CD with me next time I decide to buy a new PC. I want to be able to test it and it’s components for Linux compatibility BEFORE I buy it. If the sales people won’t let me do a test run with the KNOPPIX CD, I’ll go somewhere that will.”
I never thought of it like that. What a great idea! I have a Knoppix CD that I could do this with. Though I’m sure the clueless mimimum-wage clerk will try to stop you ’cause he/she thinks you’re messing up the computer…
The fact is, Linux users are so respectful of licenses that most of them are now switching to .ogg files instead of mp3s, because mp3 is not an open format.
Not to go off topic, but if I had to switch to ogg, it would not be a problem. I actually think that oggs sound better than mp3s. I once did a comparison: I ripped a song into a wav file, encoded one in mp3 format, then one in ogg format. I listened to all 3 to make a comparison, and of course the wav was the best, but the ogg file sounded much better than the mp3. I can’t remember if i encoded the mp3 in variable bitrate format like ogg does, but regardless, this is standard for an ogg. Ogg is better.
The GPL allows them to sell a copy of the system, but anyone who owns a copy can freely distribute (including the sources) for anyone, that´s the best part. 🙂
I’m not sure that’s the case.. it’s often been made clear that the GPL only applies to applications made from GPL code and that the maker is only required to supply the Source Code.
Lindows contains non-GPL code, presumably if I copy a Lindows CD I am breaking copyright law in relation to code that is the property of Lindows Inc
Not that that will stop me.
“”Stop insinuating left and right that Linux users are somehow less respectful of IP than Windows users. “”
Just as soon as you stop insinuating Windows users are less respectful of IP than Linux users.
As I originally stated, “In short, Linux users are no more or less respectful of licenses that their Windows counterparts, they simply have less opportunity to break them.”.
I still argue that the Linux community contains just as high a percentage of people who are likely to use pirated software/music/video as the Windows community. Can you think of a really good reason MPlayer supports the DivX codecs if not to watch pirated video, or is it just coincidence that this is the most popular codec used for this kind of piracy?
Ok, so arguing over incidentals like mp3 player legality isn’t particularily enlightening. So onto piracy then.
gtk-gnutella http://gtk-gnutella.sourceforge.net/
e-donkey http://www.edonkey2000.com/index.html
giFT http://gift.sourceforge.net/
Limewire http://www.limewire.com/english/content/home.shtml
Took me all of 2 minutes to pull out those 4 P2P clients available for Linux, and there are plenty more where they came from although the Napster ones are now only relevant in terms of this discussion. Plus the notorious Kazaa will quite happily run under WineX.
Ok, so availability isn’t an indication of use, but it is an indication that there is a market there to fill. These kinds of P2P clients are widely used to d/l pirated software/music/video. I admit their existence alone isn’t enough to prove widespread piracy using Linux, but you haven’t presented any evidence whatsoever that Windows users are more likely to pirate software/music/video than their Linux counterparts.
I’m glad to hear that none of the Linux users you know encourage piracy, but unless you know a few hundred or so then statistically it bears no relevance to the view of the Linux community as a whole.
Linux users are more respectul in terms of one, and only one, license. Namely the GPL. If the GPL gets broken the Linux community suddenly rises up as one to cast down the perpetrator. However they are not any more inclined to honour proprietary IP/Licenses than their Windows counterparts (This is just one of the many hypocrisies of the GPL, but that’s not what this discussion is about).
Conjecture? Yes, but outside of raw numbers so is your original statement implying more piracy on Windows. The difference is that my argument is based on assuming that Linux users are pretty much the same as Windows users when it comes to their view of proprietary IP/Licenses. Yours appears to assume that somehow the simple act of using Linux has made them more respectful of such licenses, which is naive in the extreme.
Okay, first let’s define what it is we’re talking about. “Licenses,” which is what we were talking about originally, doesn’t have anything to do with sharing illegal songs or music, but software. So mixing it all in the same bag is misleading. Apples and oranges. I’ll stick to the original discussion, which is about software licenses.
I’ll grant you that – even though that’s besides the point – the percentage of people pirating music and films is probably the same for Linux and Windows users. Being probably equal, though, they cancel each other out, and we have to turn to software piracy to “settle the score.”
Just as soon as you stop insinuating Windows users are less respectful of IP than Linux users.
I’m not insinuating it, I’m stating it. There’s a good reason for this: the overwhelming majority of Linux software is GPL’d, while the majority of Windows software is proprietary. The fact that there are more opportunities to pirate Windows software is directly related to the Windows business model. Because of this, even on a proportional basis, there is more piracy of SOFTWARE in the Windows world, because not only are there more users, but because the ratio of proprietary apps to GPL ones is much, much higher in the Windows world.
Linux users are more respectul in terms of one, and only one, license. Namely the GPL. […] However they are not any more inclined to honour proprietary IP/Licenses than their Windows counterparts
This is irrelevant, since they are much less exposed to those license precisely because of the nature of Open Source software, without which Linux wouldn’t be Linux. In other words, by encouraging the use of Open Source software, you are actively promoting respecting IP rights by depriving would-be violators of the main motive for pirating software.
(This is just one of the many hypocrisies of the GPL, but that’s not what this discussion is about).
A completely baseless affirmation. The GPL is a fine license that empowers users instead of ISV shareholders. Being based on copyright law, it’s even more legally sound than most EULAs would ever be if they were challenged in court (contract law having more loopholes and exception clauses than copyright law).
Conjecture? Yes, but outside of raw numbers so is your original statement implying more piracy on Windows.
Well at least we agree that, in raw numbers, piracy of software is essentially a Windows problem, and therefore there is more piracy in the Windows world. You may elaborate all kinds of scenarios of how it would be if there were more proprietary than open source software available for Linux, it’s nothing more than an exercise in futility because such a situation is quite unlikely to happen.
The difference is that my argument is based on assuming that Linux users are pretty much the same as Windows users when it comes to their view of proprietary IP/Licenses.
Even if they are, because of what I explained above, there is still less software piracy in the Linux world precisely because of the software model championed by it. I’ll grant you that it’s not because Linux users are naturally more respectful of IP; instead, the fact that a majority of Linux software is open source makes them more respectful by decreasing the opportunities for software piracy. If all software were free, there would be no more software piracy at all…
Now, if you were to say that Mac users proportionately pirate as much software as Windows users do, your argument might stand. But when all is said and done, the fact remains that because of the GPL, Linux users most likely pirate a lot less software than users of proprietary OSes, is absolute as well as proportionate terms.
Ok, so we’ve got some agreement on patent violations and media piracy, I’ll not use them again.
Also I shouldn’t have mentioned the GPL, my views on it are contradictory to that of the majority and are irrelevant to this discussion anyway.
So we come down to the software argument.
Now you’ve confirmed above that you are stating categorically that Windows users are less respectful of IP than Linux users. I still argue that this is simply not the case.
I agree wholeheartedly with you when you cite the availability of open source software as reducing the exposure of Linux users to proprietary licenses, but lack of opportunity to pirate software does not in and of itself change the nature of those who would pirate software. If someone is unwilling to pay for a licensed copy of a commercial product for Windows and instead use a pirated copy then they will do exactly the same thing should the same product be released for Linux. If you put a thief in a jail cell then they still possess the nature of a thief, despite having nothing to steal.
By stating that Linux users are less likely to pirate than their Windows counterparts you are effectively making Linux users out to be somehow better, or more responsible than Windows users. Now that might not be the impression you intended to give (And judging by the followup posts it wasn’t), but it was the impression I received, especially since there is an element on these boards which views any Windows user as stupid, non-technically minded, and just plain beneath them simply because of the OS they use.
A change in OS and the corresponding change in environment does not change the nature of the people using the OS. Lack of opportunity to pirate software does not make Linux users more or less likely to pirate it than Windows users if given that opportunity.
I stand by my original statement:
“In short, Linux users are no more or less respectful of licenses that their Windows counterparts, they simply have less opportunity to break them.”.
**
Good argument btw, aside from the occasional snipe (By me :>) it’s been excellent.
Lindows, is a sucky distro from what I have heard they have the right idea making a user friendly distro, but the $99 a year for Click ‘n Run. Come on $99!!!
By stating that Linux users are less likely to pirate than their Windows counterparts you are effectively making Linux users out to be somehow better, or more responsible than Windows users.
I’m not saying they’re better, I’m simply saying that they pirate less, and are in effect more respectful of IP – not because they have a choice, mind you, but because there are less opportunities to pirate software.
If the Linux and Windows worlds were to trade places, then I agree, Linux users would probably indulge in piracy as much as Windows users now do. But the fact is that there are less opportunites not because there are less users or less software, but because most Linux software is GPLed – something which is not likely to change.
Okay, I think we won’t really agree on this. No matter – this was a good argument, indeed. I enjoyed debating this matter with you – though now I feel we should move on.
Keep computin’!
Yup, happy trails
Actually its $49 a year for clickNRun.
If users want to try a “bootloaded” OS (that resembles Linux/Unix), why not try the QNX Demodisk…and do it for FREE? Sure, the concept of an EASY Linux distro that (original intentions:) that runs Windows programs sounds GREAT! But, is it possible? Really possible?
I’m not a zealot, I’m not knocking ANYONE’S OS of choice, and I’m not trying to start trouble…but…all the same….I’ll just quietly and contently stick with my beloved BeOS Pro R5.
Have a nice day.
JM