Yes, I, as a newbie, have a little experience with Redmond Linux (which I installed thanks to Linux Format magazine including it recently on two of their magazine CD's). Incidentally, they did not refer to it as "Lycoris". Anyway, to me it looked like a good beginning which needed a lot of work, especially with the applications included with the distribution. The installation was rather painless, but suffered from a big disability, namely, since the way hardware was installed on the version Linux Format Magazine published was by simply naming the manufacturer and model number of the various hardware on your computer. A very simple way to accomplish the task. It's a great method, IF THE HARDWARE LIST IS UP TO DATE!! Unfortunately, my video card (Matrox 450) was not on the list (only the 400 was listed)--my card worked with that choice but not as well as it should. Ditto for my Viewsonic A70 monitor and several other pieces of hardware. This defect was also noted in the accompanying LINUX FORMAT magazine article as well. There were some other defects as well which you can read about there. Naturally it is possible what I'm about to say about Redmond Linux has been fixed, but considering what needs to be fixed, I'd be surprised if it has been.
The desktop was the most (or should I say "only") impressive thing about the distribution. Just about anyone who knows their way around the Windows 9x series would have no problem finding where things were located, even though Redmond uses KDE and Gnome. Actually though I was more impressed with the "Floe" desktop which was demonstrated a few months ago at a Tri-lug meeting!! The part that was the biggest bummer was the applications included in the installation which for the most part just didn't work without constantly crashing and hanging up the computer. There were actually more that didn't work as opposed to those which did. In short, it looked as if they needed to do a lot more work insuring that all the applications that were installed (and the distribution encourages people not to pick and choose applications so there is actually no excuse for this problem) actually worked. I'm used to some applications not working in all the distributions I've sampled (Caldera, Red Hat and Mandrake) but not the large number of that Redmond presents a newbie user (which is primarily the intended user of this distribution). If they ever keep their hardware lists up to date and get the applications to work, this could indeed be an excellent system for beginners. As of now, I would not recommend this distribution to Linux beginners. Al Johnson. ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Helms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 8:53 PM Subject: [TriLUG] Opinions on Redmond / Lycoris > Hi everyone, > > Just a quick solicitation of opinions ... I have a spare box (Dell Celeron > 333 with 384 megs of RAM, 20GB hard disk, etc.), and I'm toying with a > number of Linux/Unix distributions on it. My favorites thus far are Caldera > Server as a server OS, and Lyrocis (based on Caldera) as a workstation OS. > > Does anyone else have experience with the Lycoris (formerly Redmond) > distribution? I have to admit that I like the lazy man's approach to > installation and Windows networking, but I'm more concerned about long-term > stability. > > Cheers, > -- Mike Helms > _______________________________________________ > TriLUG mailing list > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > TriLUG Organizational FAQ: > http://www.trilug.org/~lovelace/faq/TriLUG-faq.html _______________________________________________ TriLUG mailing list http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ: http://www.trilug.org/~lovelace/faq/TriLUG-faq.html
