Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Ulteo, The New 'World's Easiest Linux' 201

Posted by CowboyNeal
from the for-mom-and-dad dept.
ggarron writes "Gael Duval, the creator of Mandrake and now fired from Mandriva, has created a new Linux distro, based on Ubuntu, and it claims to be the easiest Linux, and that it will redefine the Desktop philosophy."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ulteo, The New 'World's Easiest Linux'

Comments Filter:
  • no (Score:4, Insightful)

    by User 956 (568564) on Friday March 30, 2007 @03:35AM (#18540409) Homepage
    it claims to be the easiest Linux

    No, the easiest Linux is Tivo.
  • by 4D6963 (933028) on Friday March 30, 2007 @03:38AM (#18540423)
    You mean, even easier than Slackware or even Gentoo?!?
    • by gbobeck (926553) on Friday March 30, 2007 @03:55AM (#18540493) Homepage Journal

      You mean, even easier than Slackware or even Gentoo?!?

      Gentoo is pretty easy to install. Hell, I even remember the two of three commands for installation:

      Command #1:
      cfdisk /dev/hda && mkfs.xfs /dev/hda1 && mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/gentoo/ && chroot /mnt/gentoo/ && env-update && . /etc/profile && emerge sync && cd /usr/portage && scripts/bootsrap.sh && emerge system && emerge vim && vi /etc/fstab && emerge gentoo-dev-sources && cd /usr/src/linux && make menuconfig && make install modules_install && emerge gnome mozilla-firefox openoffice && emerge grub && cp /boot/grub/grub.conf.sample /boot/grub/grub.conf && vi /boot/grub/grub.conf && grub && init 6

      Command #2:
      either 2a) rm -rf / & sleep 1000 && reboot
      or 2b) cat /dev/urandom /dev/hda /dev/sda /dev/pts

      Source: Uncyclopedia [uncyclopedia.org]


      • by Workaphobia (931620) on Friday March 30, 2007 @04:06AM (#18540527) Journal
        Gentoo is all about choice. In this case, you choose to overwrite your partitions with /dev/urandom. While that may be fine for newcommers, power-users appreciate the satisfaction that comes from catting /dev/random and manually moving the mouse to generate entropy until every gigabyte is nuked. You already took the time to compile your system from scratch in step 1; when it's time to give up in step 2, you'll want to make sure you demonstrate that same dedication to slowly acheived perfection.
        • by gbobeck (926553) on Friday March 30, 2007 @04:56AM (#18540755) Homepage Journal
          Very true.

          Installing Gentoo is a serious commitment. After installing comes the countless hours waiting for updates as well as software installs to compile.

          God forbid someone should forget that "Gentoo is all about choice" is a mandate to obscenely rice out your GCC flags and make non-trivial changes to make.conf in order to get that whopping 0.00000000000000000001% performance gain as well as the satisfaction that you know what exactly what the "OMGPONIES" and "WTFAMIDOING" GCC flags do in conjunction with the countless other ricer flags out there.
          • by cyclop (780354) on Friday March 30, 2007 @05:32AM (#18540937) Homepage Journal
            Hey, you should know that the -OMGPONIES flag makes all apps and libs shine gorgeously with GLITTER!!!! Every seasoned Unix admin knows that. Isn't it the beauty of Free Software?
          • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

            Installing Gentoo is a serious commitment. After installing comes the countless hours waiting for updates as well as software installs to compile.
            Oh, come on! You don't have to wait for updates. You could always recompile the packages that you already have. Sheesh!
          • You did have to go and remind us of the hideous (and hilarious) eyesore that some (I think it was the "Gnus for Geeks") website became last year around this time.

        • by cyclop (780354)

          Isn't it the IT equivalent of a mandala? I bet some cyber-mystic could use it as a ritual...

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by BrokenHalo (565198)
        I guess it doesn't really matter too much which distro you choose these days. They're all easy.

        What it not easy, as I've just rediscovered over the last two days, is Windows XP. I had the thankless task of ridding the boss's wife's computer of all the bugware/spyware/malware her offspring had managed to install, and in my cocky wisdom I decided to wipe everything and reinstall from scratch.

        Two days later, after pulling out hard drives to partition and format them one at a time (no sir, XP decided it didn'
        • by gbobeck (926553)

          I guess it doesn't really matter too much which distro you choose these days. They're all easy.

          I agree with you there.

          I've never had much difficulty with my various Gentoo (from stage 3 as well as the new installer), Ubuntu, (old school) Red Hat, Fedora, and FreeBSD desktop installs.

          Windows XP, on the other hand tended to be somewhat of a pain in the ass for me to get installed successfully. For some odd reason, at least 2 .cab files would claim to be corrupted, thus borking up my install. Keep in mind th

        • by thc69 (98798) on Friday March 30, 2007 @07:43AM (#18541477) Homepage Journal

          I had the thankless task of ridding the boss's wife
          So easy to misread. So very easy.
        • by dhasenan (758719)
          True; if Ulteo is going to be the easiest Linux distro, it'll have to modify KDE a fair bit, along with its default applications. Ubuntu's standard installer is pretty much the most basic possible in terms of ease of use, except that it asks you about partitioning your hard drive, so there's not much improvement available there.
          • by Digz (90264)
            Last night, Kubuntu became the world's hardest installer for me.

            Fresh download, burned the ISO to CD, tried to boot. Kernel panic and the system halts. Tried to boot with failsafe VGA. Kernel panic and the system halts. Tried to boot the diagnostics. Kernel panic and the system halts. Rebooted into XP and gave up.

            I thought I'd give Kubuntu a spin since Ubuntu had this weird delay of about 5 minutes where the system would just sit there confused before continuing on with the boot. So much for that idea. Real
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Aladrin (926209)
          "Contrast with a standard Slackware install, which is simply done with and usable in an hour. Makes me want to take the next moron who says Linux isn't ready for the desktop and shove his teeth so far down his throat he'll have to stick his toothbrush up his ass..."

          Do you think maybe this has a bit to do with familiarity?

          As a pc tech, I was used to reinstalling Windows on hosed computers. I was SO used to it that every install took less than an hour and had no issues. The first time I tried to install Sla
          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            The first time I tried to install Slackware (having previous installed Debian with several issues), it didn't take a single hour. In fact, the third and fourth install didn't take only an hour, either.

            Something tells me you didn't read this [slackware.com] or this [slackware.com].
            If you just expect things to be set up right, you can't just install and be happy. In fact, the tendency to do that with Windows leads to the hosing of said Windows systems you write about.
      • You should have warned me that the second command was the un-install!
  • Easiest or not (Score:4, Insightful)

    by owlman17 (871857) on Friday March 30, 2007 @03:38AM (#18540425)
    It doesn't matter if it lives up to its claim or not, as long as it helps the average user get into Linux. Any 'easy' distro is welcome to join the fray. Welcome aboard.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by gbobeck (926553)

      It doesn't matter if it lives up to its claim or not, as long as it helps the average user get into Linux. Any 'easy' distro is welcome to join the fray. Welcome aboard.

      Hopefully they will do the right thing and provide good user support. Having a distro which is "easy to use" is nice, but helping (read: 'rtfm' responces to user questions doesn't qualify) users out as well as having good and easy to read tutorials and documentation is a must.
  • I know I haven't. Fragmentation++

  • by mr_matticus (928346) on Friday March 30, 2007 @03:46AM (#18540461)
    How can it claim to redefine ANY philosophy if its aim is merely a rehash of the tired Windows 95 interface? Come on, a "start" menu?!

    I understand the need to make switchers feel at home, and that's great for an "easy Linux" standpoint, but don't try to shove some "revolution" bullshit down our throats at the same time.
    • How can it claim to redefine ANY philosophy if its aim is merely a rehash of the tired Windows 95 interface? Come on, a "start" menu?!

      I understand the need to make switchers feel at home, and that's great for an "easy Linux" standpoint, but don't try to shove some "revolution" bullshit down our throats at the same time.
      I agree with your criticism -- looks pretty much like a standard KDE desktop to me. At the same time, though, I wouldn't call the Windows 95 interface "tired". Basically, it works. It gives you an instant overview over what you're currently doing (taskbar) and gives you quick access to all open windows, even ones that are hidden. It allows you to open your favourite applications in one click (quick launcher). It gives inexperienced users who are looking for a certain functionality a place to look that quickly becomes familiar, is always easy to find and instantly accessible and works (start button). The entire bar gives you your entire essential "system controls" all in one place and does so without wasting much space. As a bonus, it gives you the time (and date, on KDE) at one glance. Also, the vast majority of computer users already know how to use it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

      Before anyone tears into me -- I freely admit there is room for improvement. And yes, completely inexperienced users sometimes do take a moment to get the exact purpose of, or difference between quick launcher, taskbar and system tray. But still, all in all, it's a pretty solid interface. Personally, I've never been convinced by attempts to redesign the interface. I don't like the Gnome interface because it spreads things that ought to be in one place all over the screen without serious gains in usability, and keeps me from just flicking my cursor to the upper right and clicking if I want to close a window, which is a small detail, but annoying to me. I don't like the OSX interface too much, either -- again, it spreads out stuff that might just as well be in one place, letting every window keep its menu bar to itself makes more sense to me*, and putting open and closed programmes next to each other as big colourful icons might look nice, but also feels seriously cluttered and a lot less structured to me. I admit I don't use Macs much these days, so maybe I'm overlooking something, but from what I have seen, I'm not terribly impressed.

      Most attempts at redesigning the desktop interface that I've seen may have a lower learning curve than the Windows 95 one, but they also seem to limit the user more once he gets beyond the level of an absolute beginner. And a computer just isn't a typewriter. No matter how simplified the interface is, you *are* going to have to put at least a little effort into learning how to use it. That's a basic fact that we might as well accept.

      If someone can come up with a better interface without losing functionality, I'm up for it. But why should an interface be "tired" and need to be re-designed completely just because it's been around for a long time?



      ---
      * Yes, I know that Apple's menu bar at the top came before Windows style menu bars. I learned to use computers on an old Macintosh SE with Mac OS 6.0.7.
      • There is a reason people don't go replacing old tools that work, and in a forum about Linux, one'd expect people to know it... It seems the GP doesn't. Now, I always found the Gnome bars cool, but never felt confortable using them. Reading your post I discovered why... I never tought about it with a UI pespective.

        And, about:

        "As a bonus, it gives you the time (and date, on KDE)"

        Date and an easy to access calendar. Don't forget the calendar :)... If only I could find one at my Windows computer at work...

    • by ajs318 (655362)
      Oh, For Crying Out Loud, that's it. I'm going to start MY own distro! And I'm going to base it off WindowMaker. Sod KDE and trying to pretend it's Windows! MY distro will be a clean break from the Windows mentality. I have the following design points in mind:
      1. Treat users like they have a clue, or at least are capable of growing a clue.
      2. Don't try to be like Windows. If there's a better way to do something than the way Windows does it, do it the better way.
      3. Don't pretend the command line doesn't exist.
      • by NDPTAL85 (260093)
        Hahaha I don't know if you are serious about this or not but if you are man you are seriously out of touch with non-geek users.

        There's no way people are going to put up with going through "command line exercizes" so that they can learn how to use it. To most folks a computer is a tool to get things done on, not a hobby to work on itself. The command line isn't better for anyone who is NOT a geek. For non-geeks the graphical user interface with its drag and drop abilities rules the roost. But seriously, good
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by ajs318 (655362)
          Having used both the VAX/VMS and Unix command lines, I know that there are better ones than MS-DOS. DOS really did a lot to tarnish the reputation of the command line.

          Still, just try to do the equivalent of

          $ for IMAGE in *.jpg; do THUMBNAIL="`basename $IMAGE .jpg`_mini.jpg"; convert -resize 200x200 $IMAGE $THUMBNAIL && echo "Shrunk $IMAGE giving $THUMBNAIL"; done

          through a GUI and then tell me it's quicker or easier. (Let's say for argument's sake that there are a hundred, 4-megapixel .jpg ima

      • by Bandman (86149)
        I find your ideas interesting and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

      • by Phisbut (761268)
        You're funny man!

        1. Treat users like they have a clue, or at least are capable of growing a clue.
        2. Don't try to be like Windows. If there's a better way to do something than the way Windows does it, do it the better way.
        5. No -dev packages! Put the -dev files in the main package. [...] Beside which, how many copies of msvcrt*.dll and the rest do you find on a typical Windows box?

        So we should include the -dev files in the main package because that's how Windows does it, and the users have a clue so th

        • by spun (1352)
          WTF? Since when has ANY windows application included development files?
        • by ajs318 (655362)
          -dev packages (or rather, the idea of separating out certain files which are not strictly necessary for ordinary day-to-day use of a program but required if you ever want to build something else that goes with it) are an anachronism. Back in the days when internet connections were by dial-up modem, files were often carried on floppy disks and hard disks were measured in megabytes, it made good sense to separate them. In those days, everybody using Linux was hardcore anyway and a requirement to download
      • by nuzak (959558)
        So, uh, Gentoo then.
    • Symphony OS [wikipedia.org] is taking a much more radical approach to changing the desktop environment. There are many good ideas with it's Mezzo interface, and some not so good. But it's far and away more "redefining" than Ulteo will ever be.

      Aside from that, why does Ulteo think that auto-updates are a good idea? They must have really liked Microsoft's WGA and the forced security updates and such. Mmm mm fun!

  • by simm1701 (835424) on Friday March 30, 2007 @03:56AM (#18540503)
    Real linux users:

    Have beards
    Drink (free) beer

    And ROLL THEIR OWN DISTROs!!!!!

    *cue insane laughter*
  • Based on Kubuntu (Score:3, Informative)

    by aitikin (909209) on Friday March 30, 2007 @03:58AM (#18540511)
    Having it based on Kubuntu actually worries me quite a bit. I have installed Ubuntu, Kubuntu, and Xubuntu, and the only one I have ever seen have any serious problems was Kubuntu. Ubuntu has been running for months on a completely non-tech savvy individual's computer, Xubuntu for about the same on a semi-savvy individual, and Kubuntu...Well Kubuntu crapped out on a semi-savvy individual after 2 months. I don't know if this is just my experiences coming through, but I've noticed a few others mentioning this difference as well. So I'd be glad to have something that's KDE based that I can recommend to anyone, but if it's Kubuntu based, I'm very weary.
    • by xtracto (837672)
      I concur, when trying to migrate my laptop OS to Linux I tried Kubuntu first as it was supposed to be the most complete (good CD/DVD burner, good music player, overall good software). But it was very buggy, the artsd always crashed lots of Knotify processes where making the machine slow, the cd burner (k3d) worked half of the time and overall it just fell very clanky.

      I installed Ubuntu and since then it has became my alternative OS (using XP as main) and I am very happy with it (although I cant use it as m
    • I've been using Kubuntu on my workstation for over a year, including upgrading from Dapper to Edgy. I'm more than semi-savvy (my business is based 100% on custom software I have written) and I've had no problems with Kubuntu. That you've had three computers and the one that failed was Kubuntu means nothing statistically. You're not working with enough computers to be statistically significant. Sure, "a few others" makes it interesting, but considering that Kubuntu is basically Ubuntu with a different pa
    • Re:Based on Kubuntu (Score:4, Informative)

      by naich (781425) on Friday March 30, 2007 @05:56AM (#18541043) Homepage
      Having installed both Ubuntu and Kubuntu on various PCs, the conclusion I'm coming to is that the best thing to do is install Ubuntu, get everything working and then do an apt-get install Kubuntu-desktop once it's all going. My experience is that most of the config tools are far easier to use in Gnome but that KDE is a better desktop once it's all sorted.
    • by greginnj (891863)

      So I'd be glad to have something that's KDE based that I can recommend to anyone, but if it's Kubuntu based, I'm very weary.

      I'm in exactly your position -- I am auditioning desktops for the next home install I'm doing for family. I lean towards KDE, and I'm looking for something appropriate for the non-tech-savvy. The problem with avoiding Kubuntu is that the *buntu distribution model is taking over the distro world; it's just too damn easy to ride piggyback on that distribution infrastructure for those

  • by rolfwind (528248) on Friday March 30, 2007 @04:15AM (#18540561)
    And not the article itself. Too bad, would have been nice to hear whether this was a real contender or not.
  • MyLinux the easiest Linux ever... because I SAY SO! ;)
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30, 2007 @04:28AM (#18540617)

    The article summary is slightly incorrect: Ulteo is based on Kubuntu, not on Ubuntu. This means that it used KDE instead of GNOME as its default desktop environment.

    This is not a surprise, considering that Gael Duval is a big fan of KDE and started Mandrake by adding KDE packages to a base Red Hat distribution. But this announcement of a new Linux distribution started as a fork of an existing one sounds a bit like an ego fight. Also, I have serious doubts about using KDE for the "World's Easiest Linux". Either Gael Duval plans to dumb down KDE and hide most of its options, or his definition of "easiest" is rather biased (maybe "easiest for those with a solid experience of Windows"?). Neither seems to be obvious by looking at the Ulteo web site [ulteo.com].

    Also, the only screenshot available so far [ulteo.com] does not look like something that would be really easy to use. Compared to a default KDE 3.5 installation, this screenshot looks a bit closer to the default Windows XP interface, so maybe he does really think that "easiest" means "easiest for experienced Windows users". However, Firefox looks rather standard (it is interesting to note that he does not use Konq for browsing) and there does not seem to be anything special about the Konqueror window either.

    So after looking at the various articles on the Ulteo web site claiming that it started with a study of "users with limited knowledge in computers", I am still wondering what is so special about this new fork of an existing distribution, and what it really means by "easiest".

    • by TheWanderingHermit (513872) on Friday March 30, 2007 @04:36AM (#18540659)
      Also, the only screenshot available so far does not look like something that would be really easy to use.

      Personally, I don't think many (if any) of us on /. are good judges of "easy to use" on computers. We're too involved in the technical end and know too much to judge what would be easy for someone without a lot of experience.
      • easy to use? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Raphael (18701) <quinet@gamLIONers.org minus cat> on Friday March 30, 2007 @05:04AM (#18540801) Homepage Journal

        Personally, I don't think many (if any) of us on /. are good judges of "easy to use" on computers. We're too involved in the technical end and know too much to judge what would be easy for someone without a lot of experience.

        I agree. Also, it is difficult for anybody (including usability experts) to judge anything from a static screenshot, even if you can already have some hints by looking at the crowded menus or at the buttons available in the applications. It would be easier to comment on a movie (screencast). Or just by trying it or watching other users try it.

        I have serious doubts about the usability of Ulteo when I look at the navigation on their web site [ulteo.com]. Just try accessing the items in the second-level menu bar and you should see the problem quickly: if you do not move your mouse exactly as the site designer expected, you will have a hard time selecting the item that you want. As an exercise, try selecting UlteOS/Screenshots or Docs/Documentation and see how frustrating it can be if you move your mouse a bit too far up or down. And this site is supposed to promote the "easiest Linux"?

      • by pembo13 (770295) on Friday March 30, 2007 @05:11AM (#18540829) Homepage
        I agree with your sentiment on our ability to judge something subjective such as ease of use, however, I still question how easy computer use should be made. By computer, I mean personal, general purpose computers.
        • by NDPTAL85 (260093)
          As easy as can be to bring as many people as possible into the computing fold.

          Unless of course you are an elitist prick in which case naturally you'd want some barriers to entry.
          • We've also done that, it's called typewriter... But doesn't seems so sucessfull now, it seems most people like 'hard' better.

            It's a hard rule, every time we dumb computers down, the less are we able to get from them. It is so unreasonable to persue a single standard.

          • by pembo13 (770295)
            I guess I'm an elitis prick then. Computers aren't toys any more than cars are toys.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Peregr1n (904456)
        I might be a reasonably good test bed. I recently installed Ubuntu on my home PC as my first taste of Linux. I find it easy enough to use once everything is set up, but the fact that I couldn't just click-and-install a wireless card driver just drew a blank look from me (why the hell should I need to edit config files and compile stuff for something so simple?) From my point of view, Ubuntu is pretty much there in terms of basic user friendliness and ease of use, it just needs more drivers and less applica
        • It's before my coffee and I am feeling crabby. I just hate this subtle fear and doubt BS which is based on lies and false comparisons.

          I couldn't just click-and-install a wireless card driver just drew a blank look from me

          I don't know why this persists. People appear to be so trained to tolerate Windows' annoyances that I guess the following is "one click":

          1. Hunt for a CD and put it in the drive.
          2. Try to figure out what to click on the manufacturer's custom welcome screen or trial-and-error figuring out what to click on the CD or oh wait don't actually insert the CD now wait until Windows asks for a driver disk.
          3. Agree to a EULA that strips you of all rights.
          4. Answer some questions you don't understand the consequences to or meaning of.
          5. Boggle at a scary message that these drivers are not approved by Microsoft and take the "not recommended" approach of installing them anyway.
          6. Reboot so it can "finish the installation."
          7. Reboot again to finally have the device recognized.

          why the hell should I need to edit config files and compile stuff?

          For the n-billionth time, nobody does this anymore, and hasn't for a long time. The real fact is that 99% of Ubuntu users don't even need to be aware that there is such a thing as a "driver" because the vast majority of hardware works immediately as soon as you attach it to your computer. Your plea for "more drivers" is meant only to scare people into thinking Linux doesn't have them, when in reality a distribution like Ubuntu comes with many, many times more drivers than Windows does.

          some very basic things continue to confuse me - eg. setting VLC as the default video player for all video files

          So now we take a task that is not basic -- configuring file associations or default applications is something that very few users attempt -- but call it "very basic" to make it seem like fundamental functionality is missing. Good job, there.

          • I agree with most of your points on Windows, but with Linux you are somewhat overstating your case.

            the vast majority of hardware works immediately as soon as you attach it to your computer.

            True, but critical items like video cards and wireless cards have a certain chance not to work, although this is entirely due to the driver manufacturers' refusal to release proper specifications for their cards. Even if 95% of the hardware out there works just fine, the average user does not own 95% of the world's hardwa

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          eg. setting VLC as the default video player for all video files
          Just right-click a file of the type you want to open in VLC, click properties, select the "open with" tab, and select VLC as the default player. (if it's not there, click add and select VLC from the list)
      • by nbritton (823086)
        I loose my temper every time I use GIMP, does that qualify me as good judge of "easy to use"?
    • by Raphael (18701)

      Also, the only screenshot available so far [ulteo.com] does not look like something that would be really easy to use.

      There are more screenshots available on Go2Linux [go2linux.org], describing the installation steps. It is not a surprise that it is almost identical to the current GTK+ Ubuntu installer, except for the Ulteo logo. Also, the initial boot screen has been changed to look a bit more similar to the SUSE boot splash (with the blue curves) but otherwise this is very similar to the current Ubuntu installation steps.

      this s

    • "his definition of "easiest" is rather biased (maybe "easiest for those with a solid experience of Windows"?"
      Frankly Windows is a standard. Much like the QWERTY keyboard is the standard. There have been other keyboard layouts that are supposed to be easier to learn and faster the the QWERTY keyboard. But if you already know the QWERTY keyboard then that is the easiest to use and learn.
      I have set average long time Windows users down in front of a Mac OS/X system and they hated it and thought it was harder to
  • I always said that what Mandrake needed was to ditch RPM and move to DEB package format. But the hypothetical "debdrake" never materialised, what with the Conectiva merger (they were the ones who had bodged apt to work with rpm files). Also, Mandrake and Debian have certain fundamental incompatibilities that won't go away with a few judiciously-placed symlinks. So it would have been a big jump

    The second smart thing any distro could do would be to ditch -dev packages and put the developers' files right
  • I find marketing Linux as "easy" to be nothing short of reprehensible. Hiding essential functionality behind a faux-Windows desktop not only makes Linux look like a cheap crappy Windows knock-off, but it de-emphasizes many [gnu.org] of the reasons [wikipedia.org] why Linux is better than Windows -- reasons why some people want to leave Windows in the first place. Nobody who really values easiness is going to install a new operating system. If anything they're going to buy a Mac. Linux is sophisticated and powerful, and IMHO the comm
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by jazir1979 (637570)
      it's not hiding anything, and it's certainly not reprehensible.

      linux doesn't need to be marketed to experts who know what they're doing -- because they'll choose linux anyway.

      getting n00bs to start with baby steps is not a bad thing at all, and getting people who don't need or intend to ever stray from the GUI at all onto a free, secure OS is to be commended.

      OS X hides it's unix internals far more than any of these "easy" linux distros. is that reprehensible too?
    • by Aladrin (926209)
      I think you may have missed the goal of this project (and others). The ultimate goal in a lot of people's minds right now is to get -everyone- using Linux. That means making it easy enough that major PC OEMs will start installing the system at request, and later, install it by default. Unless they aim at 'easy to use' then there's no way it'll happen.

      Linux is perfectly free to continue being a monster powerhouse. It is also free to have a cheezy frontend that looks and acts just like Windows 95. The 2
    • by joe 155 (937621)
      after I read your comment and heard about the "start" button I was ready to hate it; but it looks ok. I agree that we like linux for many reasons and hell I like a challenge with my computer (thats why I've decided that the regular bleeding edge fedora repositories aren't edgy enough and moved onto the development ones) but a lot of people just want to be secure and not have to think about anything else; people like our parents (well, mine at least). This is pretty good for that kind of user.
  • by suv4x4 (956391) on Friday March 30, 2007 @07:13AM (#18541341)
    Go on, try to quickly navigate the submenus of their site here [ulteo.com].

    Make me feel bitter about their "easiest linux ever" statement, especially the part about "easiest".
    • by Brunellus (875635)
      The marketplace demands easy OSes so they can go about wasting their time with bad website UI. Duh.
  • Whatever happened... (Score:4, Informative)

    by nschubach (922175) on Friday March 30, 2007 @08:18AM (#18541671) Journal
    Whatever happened to linking straight to the source instead of someone's lame blog? http://www.ulteo.com/main/ [ulteo.com]
  • YALD (Score:4, Insightful)

    by graybeardtechie (1081875) on Friday March 30, 2007 @09:32AM (#18542327)
    Just what the world needs - another Linux distro. Maybe if a few good folks could set their egos aside, and rather than create Yet Another Linux Distro, actually contribute to an existing community, we might converge on a manageable set of improved distros. This fragmentation is destroying, rather improving, the outlook for Linux. We are rapidly building a Tower of Linux Babel.

To thine own self be true. (If not that, at least make some money.)

Working...