Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Software GNU is Not Unix Operating Systems Windows IT

TheOpenCD turns 3.0! 17

Posted by timothy from the spread-it-around dept.
moquist writes "TheOpenCD is back, and now you can evangelize FOSS like never before. This version includes the latest stable updates of all the old favorites for Windows (including OpenOffice, Firefox, and the GIMP) and, for the first time, an Ubuntu LiveCD so that people can see the same applications running in Linux. TheOpenCD 3.0 will be the official 2005 Software Freedom Day disc."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TheOpenCD turns 3.0! More

TheOpenCD turns 3.0!

Comments Filter:

  • The GPL is not an EULA (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Xtifr ( 1323 ) on Monday July 11, 2005 @02:17PM (#13035610) Homepage
    Hmm, one thing that bugged me about the last version of the OpenCD was that it insisted you click on "I Agree" to the GPL before you install the software, which is silly, pointless and wrong. The GPL only covers distribution or other activities that would ordinarily be forbidden by copyright law. Installing and using the software is NOT one of those activities, and thus, end users do not and should not have to agree to the GPL.

    Now maybe it's because the MS installer requires there to be some text for the user to agree to, but if that's the case, then I'd like to have them put something more appropriate there, like maybe, simply, "I'd like to use this free software".

    As it is, people are left with the impression that this "Open Source" stuff has its own set of weird rules, even for end users! It may have weird rules for distributors and developers, but absolutely not for mere users! The GPL is a pretty intimidating thing for an end user to be faced with. Can you imagine how much more impressed they'd be if all they saw was a one-liner as above?
  • The site itself says they are having trouble with their bandwidth. They have a bunch of mirrors, so why don't they at least OFFER a torrent file? Just plain stupid not to.

    • Re:Why no torrent? (Score:4, Informative)

      by alanthenerd ( 639252 ) on Monday July 11, 2005 @02:44PM (#13035875)
      You mean like this one [hirisemultimedia.com] linked from the download page?

      • They could have made it a bit more obvious. I missed it the first couple times, too. They should have given the torrent a section like each country has.

        Of course, I'm getting a whopping 0 kB/s download rate using the torrent, so I'm not sure what good it's going to do...

        • They could have made it a bit more obvious. I missed it the first couple times, too. They should have given the torrent a section like each country has.

          We don't take time to read anymore, do we? I did the same thing. Not that a category header wouldn't be wise.

          Of course, I'm getting a whopping 0 kB/s download rate using the torrent, so I'm not sure what good it's going to do...

          Hey, just a little bit faster than I'm getting!

          I see 17 peers, 2 seeds. IIRC the default bittorrent algorithm will make 4

  • Why a LiveCD (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sirmikester ( 634831 ) on Monday July 11, 2005 @04:58PM (#13037185) Homepage Journal
    What I don't understand is why this CD includes a Live Ubuntu Linux CD instead of just a collection of windows-installable programs. IMHO the greatest use of this CD was to show the public that open source software is usable on any OS including Windows. It was a good tool to use when trying to convince your friends/family of the benefits of open source. They could grab a copy of the CD, install a few programs onto their computer and try them out. That is something most people understand. A LiveCD is a hard concept to explain to people, unless they are pretty computer savy (try explaining booting from a cd to someone who has never installed windows...) Besides, if you wanted to a Ubuntu Live CD, why wouldn't you just use the offical Ubuntu LiveCD? I understand that the windows programs/installation browser are still on the CD, but why even have the LiveCD on there, just fill that space with more useful windows programs to show the assimilated the way.
    • They provide both installers for windows and a Linux LIve CD "so that people can see the same applications running in Linux.". From TFA.
      So if they become used to using FOSS for their needs, they can install Linux instead of having tu buy a recent Windows for security updates. Good idea.
      • My point is that having the LiveCD functionality on the CD takes up extra space. That space could have been used for more programs. If the user wants to try out linux, the OpenCD should direct them (maybe with some links or a prompt) to an established Live CD project like Knoppix or Ubuntu...

        • My point is that having the LiveCD functionality on the CD takes up extra space. That space could have been used for more programs. If the user wants to try out linux, the OpenCD should direct them (maybe with some links or a prompt) to an established Live CD project like Knoppix or Ubuntu...

          The OpenCD has never included large amounts of programs; the first edition only had about 14, iirc. The disc only includes the absolute highest quality apps that are most likely to be useful (or interesting) to ord

    • a) It's convenient and

      b)the OpenCD Project is sponsored by Canonical Ltd, who in turn brings us Ubuntu.
  • I am puzzled by some of the choices here.

    I find it very hard to get excited about TuxPaint and Battle for Wesnoth (learning curve?). And Thunderbird, for that matter-- it's no easier to use than Outlook Express, and both are less convenient than webmail. Where's CDex, xaos, Inkscape? And why the LiveCD? It's seems so different to the purpose of the OpenCD!

    And Celestia should totally be under "Games" (or "Fun").

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close