" I've gotta be honest, when you first talked about this yonks ago I really didn't get the point.. so its ubuntu but preconfigured.."
The point being is that Ubuntu doesnt come preconfigured with anything and this isnt what users want or what they have come to expect out of a user experience. Would you rather have an experience where you can just do what you want to do and dont worry about
apt-get package XYZ? Even Linux Mint is frustrating to use.
" I just don't see how that's warranted as a new name or the hype.."
I had to change the name because of hehehehe legality issues. When you include packages not included in the Ubuntu repository you cant use, Ubuntu or buntu in the name. The is why OpenGEU had to change the name and why Linux Mint doesnt use Ubuntu or buntu
in the name. I was actually going to call it OS/4 which is what I was compiling at first but changed it due to what I perceived as Legal issues with OS/2.
" I also really wonder how far you'll get with this before it gets noticed enough and you end up having to deal with legality issues of having a preconfigured OS (windows is becoming less and less pre-configured due to legal bs).."
What Microsoft does is tie into the OS, you can take out Flock out of PC/OS and use Firefox or Opera and even Google Chrome when it becomes available for Linux. Can you take out IE? Look at everything Microsoft gets in trouble for and can you take that out
of the system? No. You can add apps, you can take apps away but not the Microsoft preinstalled stuff. Is PC/OS getting noticed? Yep it is. I have 2 vendors preinstalling PC/OS on their PC's, well one officially the other says by the end of the month.
I have a vast variety of users and its growing. I dont have any illusions of being the next great OS vendor, I have said this many times before. PC/OS will exist if I have one user or no users, its what I find useful. PC/OS has no legality issues except
for the Linux zealots like corona_coder who have mental illusions of legal problems. I personally use PC/OS on everything from the EeePC down to my lowliest file server.
Can you blame me for being excited that some people like it and have a need that PC/OS scratches.
I don't think thats nec~ true, IE is only required in the sense its a dependency for certain apis, so they can provide a html rendering ability without needing to implement a full browser stack theirself (wow imagine that).. ie the browser interface
can be disabled if required.
As for specific cases regarding pre-configured, the biggest most recent stuff was regarding having default search or a default browser at all, but instead giving the users options..
I can see the need to make linux more user friendly, but I find it somewhat ironic that theres yet ANOTHER 'distro' made to attempt this, not to mention the others you pointed out that have tried something similar..
Personally I would of tried to arrange something with ubuntu, and not to get the OS preconfigured in the sense you've gone down, because I'm really not convinced that'll be considered 'fair'.. especially in the world of open source where everyone has their
I'd go as far as saying that in the spirit of open source, pre-configurability (defaults), is really against the idea.. you should be abstracting the configuration of the OS to make it as easy as possible for the user to pick a browser, mail client, etc.. codecs
sure.. most people really shouldn't have to be bothered about that, but preinstalling codecs doesn't really warrant another distro, it warrants the media layer of the OS being able to find codecs for you seamlessly if possible.. (similar to how windows will
take you to a website for information about unknown extensions).