×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Chinese Pirates Launch Ubuntu That Looks Like XP

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the day-late-6.83-yuan-short dept.

GUI 580

An anonymous reader writes "Ylmf, famous for pirating Windows XP, have just released a version of Ubuntu that looks just like Windows XP. Really, really similar. Apparently because Microsoft were cracking down on the actual Windows XP pirating — though I think they will still suffer for ripping off the GUI exactly." Of course, if that's the sort of look you like for your desktop, you need not risk any download cooties or language barriers; a reader in the Ubuntu Forums suggests this instructional video for giving Gnome the XP treatment.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

580 comments

why? (4, Funny)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568718)

    Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?

Re:why? (3, Interesting)

kamikazearun (1282408) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568746)

From what I can see, it doesn't just look like a windows machine, (unlike most windows themes for ubuntu) the GUI behaves like windows too. This would mean people who were earlier using Windows would be a bit more comfortable using ylmf's ubuntu rather than the regular one.

Re:why? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568932)

the GUI behaves like windows too

Just add a cron script that has a 5% chance to reboot the system every half hour, and you're there! :P

Re:why? (5, Funny)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569040)

and you're there!

Not quite.

You'd need to find some way of slowing down file transfers too, add an a few dozen random "utilities" to the systray, set it to check in with Ylmf every few weeks and nag you about it, run another dozen or so malware and anti-malware apps in the background to eat some extra RAM and cpu cycles, send all your financial details off to the Russian mafia, deduct $90+ from your bank account for every app you've installed and lock itself so only 3 themes work.

That'd be a bit closer to the Windows Genuine Advantage experience...

Re:why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569044)

How do I add a cron script? Let me guess.. shall I RTFM? Sounds like another thing in Linux I need to use the command line for.

Re:why? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568750)

To get chicks?

Re:why? (1)

jginspace (678908) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568752)

Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?

You might not want but the audience is Chinese and perhaps this is what they do want. It glorious to get rich; it's not so glorious to be spending your precious time clicking around trying to get used to vagaries of Gnome.

Re:why? (1)

tftp (111690) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568754)

It reduces the shock factor when you introduce a new worker to his new computer. He may ask a few questions later about OpenOffice and the mail client though.

Re:why? (1)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569054)

He may ask a few questions later about OpenOffice

Not if he's used to Office 2003 or earlier. He'd be much more likely to ask questions about Word 2007+ iif he had to use that.

Re:why? (3, Insightful)

Bios_Hakr (68586) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568782)

A very good question. If someone went *all out* and coded the Control Panel and the MMC, it might be okay. But as far as the primary desktop, I really see no need.

As for the underlying stuff, it would allow people already familiar with Windows (MCSEs mostly) to make an easier transition. Looking at Ubuntu, 99% of the functionality is the same. I can setup screensavers (and power profiles), configure networks (including wireless), and install/remove programs. If someone emulated that stuff, my peers would have one less system of clicks to learn.

Particularly, I wish the MMC was better emulated inside Ubuntu. I can partition drives, start and stop services, add users and groups, control file shares, and check the system logs from inside one interface.

And the hardcore people (script gurus and PowerShell users) could (would probably) always learn the underlying systems.

Re:why? (1)

kawabago (551139) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568788)

Why paint a racehorse to look like a nag? Nostalgia?

Re:why? (3, Interesting)

wmac (1107843) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568894)

Can you tell me why people pay $$$ to buy windows? Are they crazy?

Obviously it is better in a considerable amount of things. Otherwise no one would pay for it.

And you need to know 90% of the people (or more) do not think the way you do.

Re:why? (3, Interesting)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568956)

Simply put, yes. They are a victim of the marketing department at Microsoft, which (look back for the article last week) has admitted to paying "independent" shills and stacking discussion panels to endorse their inferior product.

It is marketed better and more ruthlessly - that's why anyone pays for it.

Re:why? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569074)

Bullshit. The proof? I like Windows. In fact, I like it a lot better than any Linux distro I have ever used. Just last week I went to install Ubuntu on one of my older laptops and it failed to even boot. Windows XP? Booted and installed with no problem whatsoever.

Keep telling yourself those crazy conspiracy stories about shills and marketing if it makes you feel better. Meanwhile those of us who live in the real world will continue to use what we really want while you continue to declare each year for the next decade the "year of Linux".

Re:why? (2, Insightful)

starbugs (1670420) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569128)

I own my OS.

Your rent yours.

For every non-booting laptop you find, I can give you a thousand viruses and worms I'm immune to.

Re:why? (-1, Offtopic)

b4upoo (166390) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568802)

Remember Andy Warhole entering the urinal in the art show and winning! There are some very, very idiotic people who have no taste at all. They usually think they are sensitive and all knowing. Ubuntu can look really great. But a box stock XP machine looks cheesy to me.

Re:why? (4, Insightful)

theheadlessrabbit (1022587) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569028)

Remember Andy Warhole entering the urinal in the art show and winning! There are some very, very idiotic people who have no taste at all. They usually think they are sensitive and all knowing. Ubuntu can look really great. But a box stock XP machine looks cheesy to me.

It was Marcel Duchamp, not Andy Warhol, who entered a urinal into an art show, (and he did this 11 years before Warhol was even born)
And far from winning, the urinal was never actually put on display in that show. The only reason it got into the show was because the organizers accepted all submissions they received.

The point of the urinal wasn't to be looked at in the same way we look at a Michelangelo, it was to draw attention to how we look at art vs. mass-produced objects. What exactly is the distinction between a fine art object, and a non-art object? How does placing one in the context of another change our reaction?

How we approach something drastically changes how we think about it.

The same thing can be said for Windows vs. Linux. We look at Linux as being vastly superior in nearly every way, and we can't understand why regular people see it differently. When we approach linux as nerds, we miss the 1st thing that non-techy people see. That is the interface. its not about being more powerful, more stable, more flexible, and free, to them, it's about being familiar.
making Ubuntu look like XP might not be pretty, it might be cheesy, but how would a non-nerd approach it? with fear and confusion, or with the comfort and familiarity they are accustomed to? this could very possibly be a great way to help gain support in the Linux world.

Re:why? (2, Informative)

furbearntrout (1036146) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568810)

The PHB is looking over my shoulder.

  • PHB: What is that
  • me: Linux.
  • PHB: That hacking thing? ZOMG HAX PINKSLIP!!10101
  • me: ???

Re:why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568814)

True, true. And how many users will be confused and insert a CD to install their favourite Winware. Will it work, or W(h)ine?

Maybe they intend to sell machines that only LOOK like XP, until the buyer gets home and figures out...

In that vein, I have this here old VAC system, recently reskinned to run Ubuntu which LOOKS like OS-X. Its a Mac, really sir, just sign the VISA receipt... yes, just there, thank you.

Re:why? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569038)

Why would you want an orange and feces coloured UI when you can use the vastly better Windows UI?

Re:why? (2, Interesting)

cyberthanasis12 (926691) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569178)

Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?

The geek factor, obviously.
Besides, you can use it to make fun. Just imagine a new student, or a secretary, trying to comprehend what is wrong, when they try (against the policy of the institute) to install their favorite game/chat/other distraction.

The Year of the Linux on the Desktop? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568736)

The Year of the Linux on the Desktop?

Re:The Year of the Linux on the Desktop? (1)

kamikazearun (1282408) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568764)

Not quite there yet. Now all we need to do is get Open Office to look like MS Office 2007 and Amarok/XMMS to look like winamp and ...... GO ylmf GO !!!

Re:The Year of the Linux on the Desktop? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568786)

xmms has always looked like winamp and can even use winamp skins

Re:The Year of the Linux on the Desktop? (1)

craagz (965952) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568844)

xmms has always looked like winamp classic and can even use winamp classic skins

I hate the new Winamp skin.

Re:The Year of the Linux on the Desktop? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568880)

Are they working on a BSOD emulator too?

Re:The Year of the Linux on the Desktop? (1)

starbugs (1670420) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569218)

BSOD xscreensaver has been around for ages.
Lots of fun when your co-workers notice.

I've used icewm for the rest of the disguise.

Re:The Year of the Linux on the Desktop? (1)

Zemran (3101) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569212)

Please .... Amarok is sooo much better than Winamp, do not degrade it just to appease the masses...

Open source windows (2, Interesting)

mrcaseyj (902945) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568760)

When Microsoft was convicted of monopoly abuse, the judge should have forced Microsoft to release the source code of XP under the BSD license and thereby restore true competition to the operating system market.

Re:Open source windows (2, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568772)

And in turn release a plague of garbage OS code on mankind.

Re:Open source windows (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568834)

You're a troll.

"garbage OS code"

TFA is trying to fake the feel of that very "garbage OS code" here. So unless you've seen the actual code, please STFU.

Re:Open source windows (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568920)

The funny thing is, The *ENTIRE* fucking F/OSS movement is built around making cheap knock-offs of existing successful proprietary products and giving it away.

Its funny how Linux has only succeeded when you place it far away from the user (servers which require maintenance by professional system admins) or lock it down so that the user cant interact with it (embedded devices).

But on the desktop, haha. 1% market share. A resounding success.

Re:Open source windows (1)

portalcake625 (1488239) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569058)

Windows Research Kernel. It's leaked (it's the Win2k3 kernel source). Also, the Win2k source is 99.9995% complete (it's actually Win2k with SP1), it just has to be linked to RTM binaries (which mean getting a copy of Win2k RTM, installing VC6, masm, the 2k3 PSDK, creating a D: drive, oh wait, you read too much.)

Re:Open source windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568840)

maybe that would happen if we get a communist government that punishes successful corporations. sane people realize the benefits of letting companies sell products on their own terms and allowing people to reject their products and shop around for alternatives or maybe setup oss projects to create their own.

if you open source cheerleaders believe that you can find open source replacements for all MS software (as this FUD has been repeated in every ms thread), put your money where your mouth is.

even after 'selling' your shit at $0, nobody wants it. that says a lot. 0.89% market share after what.. 15years in development? I cant think of a bigger failure.. linux on the desktop is a joke. get used to it.

Re:Open source windows (1)

mrcaseyj (902945) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568994)

maybe that would happen if we get a communist government that punishes successful corporations. sane people realize the benefits of letting companies sell products on their own terms and allowing people to reject their products and shop around for alternatives

Microsoft wasn't just a successful corporation, they broke antitrust fair trade laws. The nature of operating system software hinders the ability of people to shop around for the best alternative. For example if you need a piece of application software that is only written for Windows, then it may make it hard or impractical to use Linux, even if you think Linux is better. That gives Microsoft a huge UNFAIR advantage. Their domination of the market and the value of their intellectual property are ill-gotten gains. I believe that if half the computer users out there were equally familiar with Linux as the other half were familiar with Windows, and an equal amount of drivers and software were available for Linux, Windows would quickly be driven down by Linux to a niche like OSX.

Re:Open source windows (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568854)

Yeah, and how would it turn out? Microsoft would have gone broke, Apple would be unable to pick up the slack of Microsoft, Linux wasn't in a usable state, viruses/botnets would run more rampant due to the lack of updates and a lack of security via the obscurity of the source code. Yeah, if today that happened we would have competition. In 2001/2002 all that would happen would be the collapse of the computer industry. Today the main reason why Linux isn't adopted is due to Windows programs, back in 2001/2002, neither GNOME nor KDE were in a state that people could simply pick up a mouse/keyboard and use it. Similarly, getting even connected to a network wasn't straightforward or as easy as XP. Linux would have died.

If Microsoft was forced to release the source code to XP in 2001/2002, things would not be better, the only thing that would have happened is we would have little to no technological advancement past 2002.

Re:Open source windows (1)

zeroduck (691015) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568914)

Similarly, getting even connected to a network wasn't straightforward or as easy as XP. Linux would have died.

I don't know about you, but the first *nix (FreeBSD 4 or 5) system I used, network setup was much easier than Windows. Hell, I still have to download drivers for the nic on every clean Windows install. Now getting XFree86 working right back then on my shitty hardware, thats another story (and now, using Ubuntu, I've never had graphics not work out of the box--although that can't be said of everyone in every situation).

If Microsoft was forced to release the source code to XP in 2001/2002, things would not be better, the only thing that would have happened is we would have little to no technological advancement past 2002.

I don't think forcing them to open their code would have been a good solution, but surely Microsoft wouldn't have just folded? It's not like they haven't done any development on Windows since.

Re:Open source windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568864)

No. Fucking looters.

Re:Open source windows (1)

mrcaseyj (902945) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569190)

No. Fucking looters.

The court found that Microsoft were the criminals. They looted the pockets of their customers. Their intellectual property was developed with ill-gotten gains.

Re:Open source windows (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568924)

the judge should have forced Microsoft to release the source code of XP under the BSD license and thereby restore true competition to the operating system market.

The most likely result securely anchoring Windows as the OS of choice for the masses.

Re:Open source windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568942)

Are you really deluded enough to think that would have opened up competition? It would have been the complete death blow to anything not windows. Suddenly a free OS that you can modify that runs all your games and software, Apple and desktop *nix would be completely dead.

Re:Open source windows (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569018)

Apple and desktop *nix would be completely dead.

How rude ! As a proud gay man, let me tell you I would have continued to use OSX.

Re:Open source windows (1)

mrcaseyj (902945) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569062)

Opening Windows would have enabled the creation of good compatibility layers in the other OSes. The main advantage of Linux and other open OSes is that they're open, not that they're particularly superior to Windows technically, at least not in any way that couldn't be fixed if it were open. And open source desktop *nix is practically dead anyway, or at least it hasn't really come alive yet enough to have the necessary third party software support.

Im Hit by Moderator Abuse (-1, Flamebait)

mrcaseyj (902945) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569144)

I've been hit by moderator abuse. I've gotten two undeserved flamebait mods. A comment isn't flamebait just because it tends to start a flame war. Many legitimate comments will stimulate heated debate. A comment is only flamebait if its purpose is to start a flame war rather than an honest debate.

Same problem (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568770)

It will *still* create intellectual property problems even though it's not Windows. Why not make it close enough to Windows to not be accused of cloning Windows. Use a different grass field in the background, for example. Shuffle a few things around so that they are find-able by Windows users but with a different placement and different-but-similar icons.

Someone call the woodsman! (5, Funny)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568774)

User: What a pretty GUI you have.
YImf: All the better to confuse you with, my dear.
U: And what strange fonts you have.
Y: All the better to break your layouts with, my dear.
U: And what a lack of app support you have.
Y: All the better to irritate you with, my dear.
U: And what terrible hardware support you have.
Y: All the better to eat up your time with, my dear!

Just then the hunter entered the house and cut the YImf right down the belly.

Re:Someone call the woodsman! (1)

PinkyGigglebrain (730753) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568978)

You do know that in the original version of Little Red Ridding hood there was no hunter/woodsman?

Re:Someone call the woodsman! (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569092)

True but it was also a warning about getting raped and murdered by strangers, and at some point it was considered too scary to warn kids about such things.

Point of a XP lookalike Ubuntu... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568790)

Turns out, the XP Theme is to ease the transition of Windows users into Ubuntu/Gnome. Not sure if Microsoft will retaliate regarding the Fisher-Price like UI XP uses. (Luna)

just a damn minute (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568818)

didn't Microsoft spend a whole decade defending themselves against Apple for engaging in exactly the same sort of conduct in displayed in TFA? If they sued Ylmf's developer over this, the irony would generate enough magnetism to launch another SGR 1806-20.

Re:just a damn minute (1)

TrancePhreak (576593) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568858)

No, Apple nor MS stole UI's screen for screen. They were merely taking the idea of a desktop from each other and Xerox.

Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!! (5, Funny)

linguizic (806996) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568824)

Finally Linux gets a decent GUI!!! [ducks head]

Re:Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!! (2, Funny)

Herkum01 (592704) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568866)

While intended as a joke, isn't this what Windows fan boys have been saying for years? "It does not act like Windows, it is not not ready."

Well now someone took a can of paint and slapped it all over Ubuntu, and it looks like Windows. I guess it is ready for prime time!

Re:Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!! (1)

PinkyGigglebrain (730753) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568986)

Still need the applications and games.

Re:Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!! (1)

BikeHelmet (1437881) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569024)

It has a lot of games. Compatible with hundreds, it appears.

http://www.playonlinux.com/en/ [playonlinux.com]

But installing them is still round-about.

Re:Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!! (1)

PinkyGigglebrain (730753) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569150)

Interesting site, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

However, it looks like its based on WINE and despite all the progress the WINE project has made in the last few years there are still applications and games that will not run, or run poorly, under WINE.

Until game/application companies start to provide versions of their games/apps that work natively on Linux this area will continue to be one of the holds up mass adoption of Linux.

FYI, I've been Linux only for over 3 years.
Desktop, laptop and firewall all run Debian. I use WINE for some of my games, the rest run native and several I have wanted I do without because they will not work with Linux no mater what I do. And I send them emails letting them know why they have lost a sale.

Re:Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!! (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569070)

MS Windows doesn't act like MS Windows anymore - "I'm a PC, and ripping off OS X badly was my idea".
Looking after a few dozen desktops used by developers that like to tweak things is a really good way to see how inconsistant the MS windows environment really is. Hmm, I wonder which side of the screen I have to move the mouse off to get to the hidden start menu on this one.
Since Win 3.11 was ready for prime time I suggest you fanboys stop taunting with the "is linux ready for the desktop yet" line. IMHO it was superior in networked office environments even before Win95 came out. However what really matters is the applications.

Re:Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569136)

Wait, did you just say that you don't like the ability to customize your own desktop? What? Seriously?

If you really want a default Windows UI, then just create your own account on the machine. They're called "per user settings".

Re:Finally Linux Gets a Decent GUI!!!! (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569184)

I do like that idea, it's just the main complaint by MS Windows fanboys is the wide variety of linux desktops.
If they knew a bit more about MS Windows I suppose they wouldn't be fanboys any more.

Waiting for the KDE version. (1, Informative)

furbearntrout (1036146) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568826)

Flame wars aside, I'm just getting used to KDE4, now I have to learn gnome? No thank you sir.

Re:Waiting for the KDE version. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568918)

no, now you have to learn windows xp... this is nothing like gnome, except that it runs on the gnome de. its been sooo heavily modified, its not gnome anymore... not how you mean anyway... you could learn this, and still not be able to use gnome at all!

Graphics (5, Interesting)

xant (99438) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568828)

I don't read Chinese, and I'm not about to download that--but is the point supposed to be that pirating windows is illegal and repainting Ubuntu is not?

Here's the thing: based on the screenshots, it's virtually certain that they used the copyrighted graphics that come with Windows to make this. Depending on how thorough they are, they may have used a fair amount of copyrighted text, as well.

As such, they are still "pirates". Why not just keep pirating Windows? What does this accomplish for them, exactly?

Re:Graphics (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569002)

Well, for starters, they end up with a more secure and stable product.

This is not a troll. Windows may be secure (for some values of secure, and after investing a lot in malware scanners), but pirated Windows is notoriously crappy. Even MS acknowledges that (exaggerates it even - it's a good story for scaring your customers straight).

This is a complete waste of time (3, Funny)

bashmohandes (1194771) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568830)

Why would somebody spend this time to make a 2009 OS look like 1999 OS??

Re:This is a complete waste of time (1)

aitikin (909209) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568860)

Why would somebody spend this time to make a 2009 OS look like 1999 OS??

Did you really just ask that?! Based on that logic, why would someone make an N64 emulator? Why should someone work on a PS2 emulator next year? Or a Nintendo 64 one in two years? They're not only making it look like a 10 year old system, they're even trying to make it function like one! Hell, why would someone build a replica car? It'll never be the original!

Seriously, you must be new here.

Re:This is a complete waste of time (1)

bashmohandes (1194771) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568876)

If this effort was made into making Ubuntu work like XP, like supporting Wine or something, in this it is more than welcomed, but to waste this time to get the worst of Windows XP which is the 1999 look & feel in Ubuntu, this is the complete waste of time,

Why still? (2, Insightful)

craagz (965952) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568852)

Why is Microsoft still pursuing Win XP cloning? Now that it has ended support for Win XP? Let them pirates be!

What about Icon and Graphics Copyrights? (2, Informative)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568912)

Anyone here on Slashdot who knows me knows that I am not a big fan of copyright in general as a concept and certainly not the current US implementation which has been really skewed against the public since the Copyright Act of 1976 and followed with real gems like the Copyright Term Extension Act (a.k.a "The Mickey Mouse Protection Act"). However, having said that; doesn't Microsoft own the copyrights on the Windows XP icon set? It seems to me that they could still quash this in the United States because it appears that the icon files have been ripped verbatim from Windows XP.

Pirates (4, Insightful)

Evro (18923) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568916)

Now that "real" pirates are back on the world stage, maybe we can get rid of this dumb use of the word pirate? I, at least, was pretty confused for a couple of seconds as to why pirates would do any sort of software trickery.

GO2AT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568930)

Lubrication. You wasn't on Sjteve's for *BSD because

Links (2, Informative)

a0schweitzer (1702404) | more than 4 years ago | (#30568960)

The Linuxologist ran a story covering the video [linuxologist.com] (and accompanying conversion script), mentioned by the OP, a while ago. Apparently there's an entire project [online02.com] for a gnome GUI conversion to make it look like XP.

I think it's pretty useful for convincing family members to make the switch to Ubuntu and cut down on personal Windows-related maintenance time.

Queue (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568974)

All the pro-China/anti-US comments.

5, 4, 3, 2, 1....

Re:Queue (1)

JohnBailey (1092697) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569048)

All the pro-China/anti-US comments. 5, 4, 3, 2, 1....

All the paranoid merkin wankers 5,4, Oh.. Already here I see.

Cue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569106)

it's cue you fucking clueless cocksmoking buttfucker.

well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30568980)

its not complete without BSOD copy too.

This actually makes sense... (2, Insightful)

AnonymouseUser (1701830) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569026)

Yes, it does make sense. Apparently the demand for Windows on-the-cheap is high in China, so in order to provide what the customer wants, at the price point they want, and without pirating XP, they came up with this. Everything is legit and everyone is happy (well, everyone except MS).

Excellent! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569030)

This is so perfect it isn't even funny. I can now replace the XP on my parent's computer with Linux and they won't know the difference. The "family support plan" just got a whole lot easier for me.

Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI right. (4, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569082)

The typical "open source" solution to a badly designed GUI is to make the GUI reconfigurable, with "skins" or "themes". This is an admission of failure.

Blender, the animation system, is about to do this. All 3D animation systems are complex, but Blender has an unusually confused GUI, with changes in each release and out of sync documentation. So, in the next release, 2.5, Blender will support "themes", plus some scheme for custom Python code to rework the GUI. Now the developers can blame the user.

The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI. Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application. This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream. "exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller.

For a painful example of this problem, make a wireless network connection with a Linux EeePC. All the GUI gives you is success or failure. Errors are hidden in a text window with incredibly confusing blither from about six programs used to set up the connection, several of which produce error messages in normal operation.

For better or worse, the Mac got this right back in 1984, and it's still worth reading the Macintosh User Interface Guidelines. Two rules often forgotten: "You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows", and "An alert box consists of a sentence explaining the problem, and a sentence suggesting what to do about it." The idea that you should never have to tell the computer something it already knows means that it's not acceptable to make the user copy information from one place to another. The Linux community does not get this at all, and the Windows community sometimes forgets it.

Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ (1)

slim (1652) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569182)

For better or worse, the Mac got this right back in 1984

Funny you should say that, because my abiding memory of using Macs in the mid 1990s was "Application Hypercard has quit unexpectedly due to error #{error number}"

Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ (1, Interesting)

Mystery00 (1100379) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569198)

Blender's GUI is great, it has a learning curve because it's a complicated program, like most 3D applications and takes a while to get used to. But there is absolutely nothing terribly wrong with its GUI, in fact it is faster and more efficient than the Max or XSI's.

Why? Because artists made it, and they know how they want to use their own program for their own work more than you do.

Blender is getting customisation support only to make it more accessible to people that are too stupid or too lazy or don't have enough time to go from their favourite application to Blender, it's also a bit of a side effect of the updated core which is now a lot more organised.

Label this under obligatory Blender defending.

Re:Of course. Open source rarely gets the GUI righ (5, Informative)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569204)

"The other classic vice of the Unix/Linux world is the one-way GUI. Input is graphical, but output is in a text window, because the GUI is wallpaper over some text-oriented application. This comes from a design flaw of UNIX - when you run a subprocess, you can pass in a list of arguments, but all you get back is an exit status and maybe a text stream. "exit" should have had "argc" and "argv" parameters via which the subprogram could return structured results to the caller. "

From what century are you writing this? 18-th or maybe 19-th, I wager?

FVWM was good enough in my day (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30569102)

FVWM was a good enough Windows knockoff for us in my day and it should be good enough now. But no, you kids gotta have your fancy XP icons and wallpaper.

Now get off my lawn!

Be careful what you demand Microsoft... (3, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569132)

For the longest time while Microsoft was busy solidifying its monopoly position on the desktop, it did nothing short of encouraging copyright infringement by actually reporting "pirated copies" of its OS in its reported figures.

Once that mission was accomplished and any sort of competition was put behind them, they started using stronger means to protect their software. But perhaps the measures are too strong in today's "Linux curious" environment.

When a Linux desktop distro looks exactly like Windows XP, people already know how to use it. And with WINE being in a rather mature state, lots of software will run just fine... (including malware, I'm afraid...) It still will not be long before people realize they are not using Windows, but are quite able to use it... they will also realize that they CAN use it and may not need Windows after all. Perhaps this is something Microsoft doesn't want people to know.

Make WinXP look like KDE; Make GNOME look like . (5, Informative)

hduff (570443) | more than 4 years ago | (#30569166)

Make WinXP look like KDE http://www.tech-atom.com/windows/ultimate-linux-transformation-pack-for-windows-xp.html [tech-atom.com]

Make GNOME look like WinXP http://ubuntu.online02.com/xpgnome [online02.com]

Make WinXP look likeUbuntu http://pc-hacks.blogspot.com/2007/10/make-up-over-your-windows-look-like.html [blogspot.com]

Make WinXP look like Enlightenment http://www.litestep.net/ [litestep.net]

Make Linux look like Win95 http://fvwm.org/ [fvwm.org]

It all makes my head hurt.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...