Charlatans in our midst

Look at this (http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS4417146902.html):
After promising a vendor-neutral Desktop Linux Summit, Michael Robertson and Lindows.com have gone back on their word and have attempted to hijack the event (http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS4417146902.html) for their own purposes.
"Then, last week, Lindows.com suddenly and unilaterally directed DesktopLinux.com to substitute a new agenda for the old one -- one that had not been discussed or reviewed with the Advisory Board. The agenda was a completely new one, with major changes such as substitution of Lindows.com CEO Michael Robertson for Open Source advocate Bruce Perens in the conference welcome keynote slot."
This is just plain despicable. It's a shame that the GPL doesn't prevent criminals like Michael Robertson from raping the community.

[TRN]

This is just plain despicable. It's a shame that the GPL doesn't prevent criminals like Michael Robertson from raping the community.

I'm not sure it is rape. The word is rather severe. However, it is disappointing. Most of us who have been neutral are probably closer to standing on one side or the other of the fence now ...

We were preparing a review of LindowsOS and will continue to work on it but a company's interest in the community is definitely part of the formula for a good rating. Maybe the move is a misunderstanding and it will be straightened out in one of Mr R's emails ...

:roll:

[Davepet]

There's something about that guy that just bugs me...can't put my finger on it, though.

Probably has something to do with those "Michaels Minutes" emails that seem to be more advertisement than information.

Dave

[TRN]

There's something about that guy that just bugs me...can't put my finger on it, though.

Probably has something to do with those "Michaels Minutes" emails that seem to be more advertisement than information.

Dave

Yes, the emails can be rather .. well .. let's just say that I stopped posting them in the forums. I used to do that and figured if Kraig wanted to put them in the forum then that is fine - but I will not add them unless they have news content or a good point of discussion. Maybe I'm just upset because Kevin@Lindows.com didn't reply to my emails. Oh well. It happens. Even my sister said that she emailed me and I didn't see it ! So, things happen.

God that Michael Robertson is such a liar! (http://home.houston.rr.com/texstar/robertson.jpg)[/url]

Lindows.com seems to be the only successful Linux company out there.

Maybe that's why so many Linux geeks are pissed off at them. They hate it that Lindows is letting WalMart shoppers in the geek club.

[Z_God]

Who cares about these things? As long as Lindows.com contributes to opensource software, I like them.

What has lindows contributed to open source?

Exactly how is lindows the only successful Linux company? They have failed to achieve their claim of running windows software and they most certainly have not been around as long as SuSE, RedHat, or Slackware.

[Z_God]

Well, they've contributed to Wine and several other projects. If you follow the mailinglists you'll sometime see people from Lindows.com.

[TRN]

What has lindows contributed to open source?

Exactly how is lindows the only successful Linux company? They have failed to achieve their claim of running windows software and they most certainly have not been around as long as SuSE, RedHat, or Slackware.

They fund several projects - KDE-look.org and gaim.

In terms of the Windows claim, I suspect that it was wiser for LindowsOS to be focused on Linux products and not trying to run MS products.

In terms of length of time in business, you are correct. SuSE, RH, and Slackware have been around much longer. Gentoo being one of the fastest growing distros. However, LindowsOS is being offered in retail establishments like Walmart -- and this is great news for Linux.

Lindows.com seems to be the only successful Linux company out there.

You're just making that up. Show me proof that Lindows is successful at all. And no, comments by Michael Robertson or Kevin are not proof. Neither is the amount of press they get, since PR has nothing to do with actual sales. Lindows are a private company, there is no way of telling how successful they really are because they don't have to make their details public.

Maybe that's why so many Linux geeks are pissed off at them. They hate it that Lindows is letting WalMart shoppers in the geek club.

Mandrake and Lycoris are available in Wal Mart as well. They are good distributions that people buy for their quality, not their advertising. Lindows is like Microsoft: they are a PR company pretending to be a software company.

They fund several projects - KDE-look.org and gaim.
Lindows fund a few high-profile projects with a little money and code, and then trumpet this to the world at the top of their lungs. Other companies (especially MandrakeSoft, Red Hat and SuSE) contribute far more, both to high-profile projects (eg MandrakeSoft is always listed by both KDE and GNOME in their lists of companies to thank) and to really important projects (like the kernel and gcc). Do they run around demanding credit for their work? No.

Lindows.com never mention the true names of the software they are using (so gaim becaome the "LindowsOS IM client", Mozilla becomes the "LindowsOS browser", and other apps get completely different names), and they try to gain credit for their whole development. They stick price tags on free software and claim that Click-n-Run gives 'value' because it is providing these for free.

Lindows is a parasite just like Caldera/SCO.

[TRN]

They fund several projects - KDE-look.org and gaim.
Lindows fund a few high-profile projects with a little money and code, and then trumpet this to the world at the top of their lungs. Other companies (especially MandrakeSoft, Red Hat and SuSE) contribute far more, both to high-profile projects (eg MandrakeSoft is always listed by both KDE and GNOME in their lists of companies to thank) and to really important projects (like the kernel and gcc). Do they run around demanding credit for their work? No.


I hate to be in the unique position of actually defending Lindows.com but the word demanding is a bit too extreme for my taste. Lindows.com is a company attempting to be profitable. It is fighting against Microsoft and there is no need for it to also fight against the Linux community.

The companies you list (MandrakeSoft, Red Hat, and SuSE) should all be praised for supporting projects. I'd never want that to change and I'd love to see Lindows.com start to support more projects. Give them time and hopefully they will support other projects.


Lindows.com never mention the true names of the software they are using (so gaim becaome the "LindowsOS IM client", Mozilla becomes the "LindowsOS browser", and other apps get completely different names), and they try to gain credit for their whole development. They stick price tags on free software and claim that Click-n-Run gives 'value' because it is providing these for free.

Lindows is a parasite just like Caldera/SCO.

Yes, they rename projects. I don't believe that this is done to insult the project but to promote their own name. It is a part of marketing and branding. If you read Red Hat's statement several years ago before going public (regarding Linux and open source), they state clearly that branding is the key to success in a market filled with many choices.

In regards to some of your other statements -- yeah -- the CNR may appear to be poorly done because free software is mixed in with the commercial products. However, the CNR includes commercial projects, and this is where the value is gained.

(wiping brow) I can not believe that I'm sitting here typing a favorable post regarding Lindows.com. Oh well. Maybe I'll insult them tomorrow :lol:

[Z_God]

Lindows fund a few high-profile projects with a little money and code, and then trumpet this to the world at the top of their lungs.
They've probably done more than you have to enhance the Linux experience.

Lindows fund a few high-profile projects with a little money and code, and then trumpet this to the world at the top of their lungs.
They've probably done more than you have to enhance the Linux experience.That's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Most people don't have millons of dollars to spend, and most people aren't trying to make a profitable business out of free software. Making money from free software isn't a bad thing, but when you disrespect the people who are donating their hard work for free you are just being a rotten thief. I spend several hours a day developing free software and helping people with technical problems. I don't get paid anything, and I don't mind that. As a proportion of total capabilities, I am giving far more than Lindows.com do.

[gabbman]

LPH wrote:(wiping brow) I can not believe that I'm sitting here typing a favorable post regarding Lindows.com. Oh well. Maybe I'll insult them tomorrow

Atta boy, keep the faith. Even if some of the zealots doing the arguing don't want to sign in and own up to their beliefs. :wink:

[robbie_n]

I think that this topic has outlived its usefulness, LPH.

[Z_God]

Well, as long as Lindows.com somehow contributes to my desktop experience, I like them. I don't really care about their other stuff.

I believe you can't say they disrespect the people who did the work for them. About Lindows.com changing names, the IM client does say powered by GAIM. Also Mozilla.org doesn't want Mozilla to be known as an end-user browser. The distros that actually call Mozilla Mozilla are being stupid here because people could associate those versions with Mozilla.org, which they don't seem to want. Renaming the suite has thus also been done with respect to the original authors.

Well, as long as Lindows.com somehow contributes to my desktop experience, I like them. I don't really care about their other stuff.As somebody who actually contributes to free software development (i.e. not a leecher) I feel used and insulted by Lindows.com's actions. Plenty of people I know feel likewise. No other distro is this disrespectful of the developer.Also Mozilla.org doesn't want Mozilla to be known as an end-user browser. The distros that actually call Mozilla Mozilla are being stupid here because people could associate those versions with Mozilla.org, which they don't seem to want. Renaming the suite has thus also been done with respect to the original authors.Not quite true. Mozilla isn't curretly designed to be an end-user browser, but they have no problems with people using it as such. If they didn't care about the end-user, they wouldn't be adding features at all and they would be focusing exclusively on the Mozilla development platform instead of Seamonkey (the browser suite). After Mozilla 1.4, Mozilla.org's attention will switch towards the end-user, and Mozilla 1.5+ will have proper end-user apps.