Beta
×

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!

Google Unveils The Google Pack

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the i-think-we-already-run-with-that-pack dept.

Google 473

7hunderstruck writes "Google yesterday announced the release of Google Pack, a 'free collection of essential software'. Along with Google's own programs, such as Google Toolbar and Google Earth, Google Pack contains Firefox, Adobe Reader, a six month subscription to Norton Antivirus, and Trillian as well as other apps. Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things), but it will be nice to make it all widely available to the general public." Commentary on ZDNet.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

"Free" (0)

Andrew Tanenbaum (896883) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416358)

You can hardly call it free when part of it expires in six months

Re:"Free" (5, Funny)

metaomni (667105) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416380)

The free piece of cheese I get at the supermarket from the nice little lady expires in about 12-14 hours... doesn't make it any less free.

Re:"Free" (1, Funny)

TerranFury (726743) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416452)

>The free piece of cheese I get at the supermarket from the nice little lady expires in about 12-14 hours... doesn't make it any less free.

...and the nice piece of expired lady that I get at the supermarket doesn't smell any less like cheese...

NOBODY WANTS TO SEE YOUR WITHERED COCK! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416422)

You motherfucking perv

Re:"Free" (4, Insightful)

narooze (845310) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416433)

Well, it's not far from the product you get when paying: If you pay for NAV the update subscription still expires, only after 12 months instead.

ClamWin (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416462)

For their XP userbase, they should have included ClamWin [sourceforge.net] instead.

But, ClamWin is unlikely to pay Google for distribution like Symantec.
Ditto with Spybot [safer-networking.de] vis-a-vis LavaSoft.
Et PDFCreator [sourceforge.net] v. Adobe.

Re:"Free" (2, Insightful)

drsquare (530038) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416557)

So you're saying you have to pay for the six month trial? That's the only way it couldn't be counted as free, and the only way your post would make any sense whatsoever.

"widely available to the general public" (0, Offtopic)

dbolger (161340) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416359)

Unlike this page. Why did I just get a 404 on /.??

My Frist Fsirt Psot! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416360)

OMG LOL BBQ!!!!!!!111111111111111111

nortan anti-virus (5, Insightful)

bobby1234 (860820) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416364)

forget it you could get me to install it if it was free forever.... avg for me... http://free.grisoft.com/ [grisoft.com]

Re:nortan anti-virus (1)

Tango42 (662363) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416369)

I agree - AVG would have made more sense.

Re:nortan anti-virus (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416529)

My Windows box would require a commercial AVG licence - they want to charge me simply because I run Win2K Server instead of Pro, regardless of what I actually use it for. So I use the Clam [clamwin.com] instead.

Of course, my other 5 machines run Linux or FreeBSD, and this isn't an issue for them. :)

(Spelling Nazi Alert: It's Norton, for crying out loud. Geeez.)

Avast (2, Interesting)

NaNO2x (856759) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416395)

I myself would sugest Avast [avast.com] , I've never had an issue with it. Though I haven't used AVG for years it could have changed, back then it wasn't looking to good.

Re:Avast... arrrrr (3, Funny)

thelost (808451) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416505)

I also use avast and have had it filter out many a virus; I chuck it an orange now and then to prevent scurvy and it seems happy. arrrrrr

Free virus checkers (3, Interesting)

AC-x (735297) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416415)

Going a bit of topic here but what's peoples opinions of AntiVir? Seems fine myself but everyone else seems to use AVG

Re:Free virus checkers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416470)


i like it, its a lot less resource hungry than the rest, its pretty accurate and works well on my trusty pIII 500+192mb ram + XP (even had it working well on a customers win98+16mb ram)

Re:nortan anti-virus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416481)

Too bad AVG's UI looks like ass.

Re:nortan anti-virus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416532)

The great thing about AVG though, is that it is non-intrusive so you don't really have to look at the UI too much after the initial set up. I've switched from avast to AVG on my laptop and I just occasionally see the update window do its thing automatically and then close, and in the morning when I get to work, I see the full scan report come up and that's about it. The last time I was looking at the control panel was when I installed it because you never really have to mess around with the settings.

One thing that had always pissed me off about Norton AV is that at the time I was using it (maybe that has changed since then), every time live-update would automatically update the virus definition, it would force you to reboot your computer... That is really gay.

Respectable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416365)

I have FireFox... what more do you need?

Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP (2, Insightful)

oilisgood (161130) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416367)

Oh well.

Re:Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP (1, Redundant)

putko (753330) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416467)

What is this "Windows XP"?

Is that some other software that Google provides? Is it some "free software" that I haven't heard about?

I need to be able to audit, compile and patch the source -- anything else is aginst my security policy.

Re:Google Pack is only available for WindowsXP (2, Informative)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416537)

I think only certain builds of Windows XP too.

I'm running XP here and it won't let me download it.

"Any respectable /. reader"? (5, Funny)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416371)

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already

From http://pack.google.com/ [google.com] :

System Requirements
- Windows XP

I think there is a disconnect somewhere... ;-)

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"? (4, Funny)

jlowery (47102) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416390)

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already.

Are there any respectable /. readers?

d00d (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416400)

wut, r u still on dat old berkley softwarez? tyme 2 upgradiate 2 XP PROFESSIONAL, dawg! w0rd.

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"? (1)

gronofer (838299) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416401)

I'm not sure, how many Slashdot users are respectable anyway?

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"? (5, Funny)

Moby Cock (771358) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416413)

Actually the requirement is:

Windows XP with Administrator privileges

Which I understand is pretty easy to get over the internet.

Why "XP Only"? (4, Interesting)

Chelloveck (14643) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416417)

System Requirements
- Windows XP

I think there is a disconnect somewhere... ;-)

This is a bad trend. All of the software (with the possible exception of Norton AV, which I've never used) runs just fine on Win2k. Why the XP restriction? This is twice in one week I've run up against an arbitrary won't-install-on-2000 roadblock. (The first was trying to install Age of Empires III, which actually runs just fine on 2000 if you can manage to trick the installer.) It looks like the days of Win2k are numbered, not because it can't run the software but simply because the software refuses to install. I really hate artificial limitations.

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416430)

I thought by now we'd at least have a google earth client for linux. Considering how linux forms the foundation of Google's success, you'd think they'd try to do more for the community. They've contributed a few trifles, but by and large, they take a whole hell of a lot more than they give back.

The genius of Google is that they have so many other geniuses propping them up. The goodness of Google is, well, what was it again?

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"? (5, Insightful)

blkros (304521) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416471)

I think you've hit the nail on the head, so to speak. Google seems to take without really giving much (except talk). Yeah they have funded some stuff, but really, in relation to their income, it's not even a drop in the bucket. They use open source software, and yet, everything they put out is proprietary. That's not giving back, and it's not doing good (although I guess it's not"evil" either, just kinda shady.).

Re:"Any respectable /. reader"? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416575)

Yeah, they could at least provide some free services in return for all the money I give them.

Respectable /. user (0, Redundant)

borgdows (599861) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416372)

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things)

I don't understand! Shouldn't any respectable /. user run Linux?

Branded? (3, Insightful)

Tango42 (662363) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416376)

Are the non-google products identical to the versions issued normally, or are they branded? It says firefox comes with the google toolbar (does it add anything to ff? I can already search google easilly and block popups...), is that the only modification?

I'm not sure why google are doing this, unless they're getting paid (in money or some other way) by the producers of the software...

Re:Branded? (4, Informative)

linuxci (3530) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416442)

The Google toolbar for firefox only adds a few items that I consider useful, however as this toolbar integrates seamlessly with Firefox toolbar customisation then you can just move the items you need into other areas of the screen and hide the toolbar itself.

e.g. the Google search box on the toolbar incorporates Google suggest, so I've customised the toolbar and removed the Firefox built in search box and replaced it with the Google one.

I also like to see the pagerank of sites that I help develop so I've dragged the pagerank icon to the left of the throbber on the menubar (Linux and Windows) or to the left of the personal toolbar (on Mac) so I can see it at all times. Then I hide the rest of the toolbar.

To customise toolbars simply right click on any area of the toolbars that don't have any other context menu (e.g. reload, stop, home buttons) or select View > Toolbars > Customize.

Google are also offering $1 per download to members of their adsense program who put a link to download Firefox with the Google toolbar on their sites. For Google it is good to encourage use of Firefox as Firefox will not default to MSN search like IE does - and remember what Ballmer wants to do to Google!

Re:Branded? (4, Informative)

wazo2k (533400) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416492)

I'm not sure why google are doing this, unless they're getting paid (in money or some other way) by the producers of the software...

according to the google blog [blogspot.com] they are not getting paid:

We worked with a number of technology companies to identify products that are the best of their type to create this suite. (We didn't pay them, and they aren't paying us.)

Re:Branded? (1)

xoip (920266) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416567)

I'm not sure why google are doing this, unless they're getting paid (in money or some other way) by the producers of the software.
Partnering to extend the functionality of Google lets both parties create value in a way that guards against M$.

Source? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416378)

Where's the fucking source code, Google?!

XP only (2, Interesting)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416381)

Wheres the mention that it's XP only in the article text? I personally feel this is rather an important fact in not wasting people's time on stuff they can't use.

Re:XP only (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416510)

Yeah. I see this (assuming we use Microsoft s/w) as trend, and a one I don't expect at /..

I find it somewhat insulting, actually.

Not Gaim? (4, Interesting)

SWroclawski (95770) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416382)

Google hired the main Gaim developer, and they don't ship it as part of the Google Pack?

Despite the article- I don't see Trillian listed in on the article page. If they ship Trillian and not Gaim, that'd be even more strange.

Re:Not Gaim? (5, Informative)

AC-x (735297) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416423)

Trillian is included. It's not there by default but they do give you the option here [google.com]

Re:Not Gaim? (1)

FastMemFirst (912935) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416428)

If you click "add or remove software" then there's an option (disabled by default) to install Trillian, as well as RealPlayer and Google Talk.

Re:Not Gaim? (1)

Kugrian (886993) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416570)

Trillian over Gaim seems a weird choice to me as well. My any other IMs anyway when they already have their own brand?

Only reason I can think of (admittidly, I prefer Gaim over Trillian anyday) is they'll get a cut from any full license buyers (didn't RTFA, but guessing it's the trail version of Trillian). Not a bad thing I guess, but depends on who the audience are. XP only and with the inclusion of Norten I'm assuming they'll be targetting the less savvy net users with money over sense.

HAY LOOK! GOOGLE DID SOMETHING!! (-1, Troll)

wheany (460585) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416384)

*slurp* *slurp* *slurp*

MOD PARENT UP (0, Troll)

repruhsent (672799) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416454)

The constant knob slobbing over Google's every chunk of turd is really getting old.

Slashdot-moderator dork of the year: Zonk! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416385)

Respectable slashdot users don't use windows.

I should stop reading slashdot. Too many windows-using moderators these days.

I Guess I'm Not A Respectable /. User (1, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416386)

> Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed
> already (excluding a few things)...

I don't have most of those things installed, couldn't if I wanted to because I don't use Microsoft software, and wouldn't want most of it even if I could install it. I guess I'm not a real Slashdotter.

Re:I Guess I'm Not A Respectable /. User (1)

szo (7842) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416517)

very bad trend on /. in deed. Nowaday we have /. authors who can get away with implying that any sane /.-er actually uses windows. CmdrTaco, have an author meeting and set this straith, or many of your supporters will leave!

Respectable? (1)

undeadly (941339) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416387)

"Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things), but it will be nice to make it all widely available to the general public."

Any respectable Slashdotter will not just download random programs from Internet and install it on his pirated Windows machine overclocked to instability, or?

Hmmmm... (1, Funny)

bride_of_excession (943938) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416391)

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already


GooglePack is only for winXP.
I thought most "respectable /. users" used *nix...

But PDF? (1)

dhasenan (758719) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416425)

Off topic, I admit, but is there a decent PDF reader for *nix? [X|G|K]PDF doesn't handle some PDFs, and Adobe for Linux is both ugly and slow.

Re:But PDF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416489)

Use KPDF for everything, and Adobe Reader for the pdf's that KPDF cannot render properly...

Re:But PDF? (1)

mattyrobinson69 (751521) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416498)

I've never had a problem with kpdf or kghostview, maybe i dont view the 'right' pdfs though.

Re:But PDF? (1)

orasio (188021) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416565)

The problem with "doesn't handle some PDFs" is a tricky one.
Get a new kpdf version, and you will be happy.
I found myself bitching about my gnome, and then I looked the "about" dialog and it's from 2001!! Sometimes you need to upgrade, and get current software so you don't suffer from old bugs.
Of course, if what you want is acroread, then get acroread and don't complain.

Norton? (5, Interesting)

Jesus IS the Devil (317662) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416392)

Why did Google choose to include Norton? I've found Norton AV to be the most worthless antivirus software I've ever used. It has consistently let me down in terms of protecting my computer. I've even tested it against a known virus. A rival AV was able to catch it. Norton wasn't.

A couple of times I was hit by a trojan by simply going to a web page. Next thing you know, my system gets infected, and Norton shuts down completely and won't start back up again. That's what you call protection? No thanks.

Re:Norton? (1)

Fearan (600696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416441)

So Norton is like putting on an expired condom filled with holes on your Horton. Oh well, something /.er's don't need to worry about!

Re:Norton? (1)

IAAP (937607) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416459)

Norton.

Speaking of which, I won't even buy their products because of their business practices. I go into a store, It's listed as something like $39.95, then there's a $20 mail-in rebate. I hate rebates and refuse to purchase any product that has a mail-in rebate. Hear that Dell?

Also, after you mail in the rebate, of course, you have to have your: name, address, tel #, and product registration.

Now, I ask you, with that kind of information and the access to your systems internals (everything on your computer), what kind of information about you are they collecting? even if it's benign, they're still collecting one hell of a marketing database!

Re:Norton? (1)

the.Ceph (863988) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416519)

My guess would be the product registration is to prove you didn't go into the store, buy 1 copy, then photo copy a bunch of stuff and have the 20 dollar rebate sent to you and each of your friends.

Re:Norton? (4, Informative)

donovangn (728687) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416465)

I run into this same issue on so many of my clients' computers. I end up removing Norton as it was either expired or somehow broken. At least half the time the damn thing doesn't uninstall. This is such a pervasive issue that Norton had to write a removal (SymNRT [symantec.com] ) to clean up where their uninstaller failed. Eventually they should move that tool to this page [symantec.com] .

Re:Norton? (1)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416568)

I have to admit I don't use Windows much since it only runs the occasional game here but I do have clients and friends w/ Norton and both the feedback and my own impression of it haven't been too good.
It does seem to take a lot of ressources while not being very effective. Nowadays I tend to recommend Avast! or AVG.

Google obviously didn't pick it based on its merits. A check must have been involved at some point :)

Odd statement (2, Insightful)

toupsie (88295) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416397)

but it will be nice to make it all widely available to the general public.

That's an odd statement. Weren't all these software packages widely available to the general public before? I like Google and all but come on. I really don't see what the big deal is. You can download all these programs from Google? Whupty-fword. And it doesn't work with my Mac OS X box which makes sense because I don't need Ad-Aware and Norton Antivirus for safe surfing. Plus PDF viewing is built into the OS through Preview.

Am I missing something here?

Re:Odd statement (1, Offtopic)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416414)

Am I missing something here?

Zonkification.

KFG

Re:Odd statement (1)

jumpfroggy (233605) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416525)

I've been trying to figure this one out, and I was waiting for the slashdot crowd to weigh in. The only thing I can figure is that this is a loss-leader (without the loss) kind of deal. Notice the "automatic updates", so the pack will morph over time. I'm sure new programs will be added, and more little google-bits will find their way in.

It is many things that most people probably should be using. They're all available free separately (minus NAV, but yuck), and the only thing this really gives you (besides the screensaver... where else is that??) is convenience.

So:
-users use google pack instead of downloading each one. it's convenient, it works.
-later, google adds more google apps and starts expanding the "pack" into a platform.

Seems to make sense...

Reminds me of Aple Quicktime + ITunes + (...) (0)

c0007031 (919859) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416402)

I loved the selection of software included: Norton Antivirus, Ad-aware... I really tend to download them a lot... but you can't download only the programs you want... that sucks! Google now reminds that they are a company that aims to take over the internet...

Look a bit further... (1)

SleepyShamus (599356) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416450)

If you look under the download button, you'll see "Add or Remove Software". This takes you to a page where you can remove the software you don't want/need and gives you a few additional options not in the default package.

Norton? (2, Insightful)

Better.Safe.Than.Sor (836676) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416405)

Norton AV has been crapping out for awhile now and I suspect that Google was able to partner with them on the cheap. OTOH many corporations still use Norton AV so perhaps Google has plans involving the big boys. Just to PO Steve B, hehehe. Watch out for that chair!

Google Linux Pack anyone? (1)

c0007031 (919859) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416408)

What about other operating systems? Do you folks at Google only use M$ s...tuff? And why not send CD-ROMs with this software to places that don't have a good internet connection?

Let's see... (4, Interesting)

CharonX (522492) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416409)

Google Earth is more of a "fun" program. Nice to toy around once in a while, but nothing I have always installed.
Picasa is nifty. A free image editor is always nice.
Google Pack Screensaver Don't really care about that one. I usually blank my screen.
Google Desktop I don't use since I have "order in my chaos"(tm) and don't really like to things hooked into everything.
Google Toolbar for Internet Explorer will be a godsend for all IE unsers, but I don't need it since I do Firefox.

Mozilla Firefox with Google Toolbar guess this will make Firefox's markedshare do another jump.
Norton Antivirus 2005 Special Edition - personally I use AntiVirus Personal Editon [free-av.de] , its free and quite good, but if I think about all the PCs without any up-to-date protection out there its a real godsend.
Ad-Aware SE Personal 4236 programs found? If you have used IE, not used a virusscanner and/or have a "shiny, let's click it" PC user this thing will cleanse your system. Otherwise once every 3 months is sufficient.
Adobe Reader 7 A no-brainer, one of the most portable formats around (let's see how Open Document spreads), .doc eat your heart out.

Re:Let's see... (1, Interesting)

keraneuology (760918) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416478)

Picasa is nice, but doesn't hold a candle to the free paint.net [wsu.edu] - the most powerful non-GIMP free image editor I've seen that is amazingly easy to use and intuitive - IIRC you can even extend it with plugins (not that many out (yet?)).

Re:Let's see... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416553)

I don't mean to gripe, but it's actually called "AntiVir PersonalEdition Classic". There's no u-s in AntiVir. You might also prefer the English [free-av.com] page.

Hmm, Version 7.0 Beta with a redesigned interface... I'll have to get that when I reinstall Windows on my new hard drive next weekend.

There's a reason this is XP only (2, Insightful)

linuxci (3530) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416410)

There's a reason this is XP only and that is because it's designed for people to help out their less computer literate relatives who have just purchased a computer and give them a way to download most of the important 'essentials' and keep them up to date farily easily.

People who use Linux are not their target, Linux distributions come with all the apps you could need and very few newbies would likely have the option to buy a Linux system.

For them it's almost always WinXP forced down their throats unless they notice these Mac things in the store they bought their iPod - and there's no need for this pack on the mac either - the Mac already comes with a modern web browser, a decent desktop search (since Tiger), the iLife apps for photos, etc.

There's two things wrong with the Google offering and that's all I could see - one is the choice of anti-virus (only free for a limited time and not the most trustworthy name around) and the central updater duplicates the roles that the Firefox and Adobe updaters perform. They should have disabled the individual updates if they were going for a central solution.

What a letdown. (3, Insightful)

blkros (304521) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416411)

This is supposed to be a "great" announcement? That's it? A bundle of software that's available anywhere? And none free/libre? and Norton isn't free since you have to pay for updates after 6 months (just like any other OEM installation). Why not choose AVG, which has free updates, on it's personal version, forever?

Bet their stock pricer just went down. ...and all of it only works on XP? No wonder Bill Gates dismissed them out of hand at CES.

Looks nice...is it nice though? (1)

msid (943658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416418)

First of all this pack targets Windows users only, which leaves the rest of the market share totally unaffected. This is not necessarily a bad thing since I don't like the contents of the google pack. Especially the "Google Tools", Google toolbar. In my opinion this is another "shiny", "nicely folded" marketing and data mining attempt targeting once more the most clueless share of the market, Windows users, that will happily download it cause "it's Google, it's nice".

forgetting something? (2, Interesting)

know1 (854868) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416431)

"Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things)"
well i installed nothing from it as i'm on of the "respectable /. user(s)" running linux on my main box. Seriously google, port some of this amazing software to the operating system that gave so much to you on the back end while you were starting up - all for free

Re:forgetting something? (2, Interesting)

Junta (36770) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416523)

Sounds all nice and good, but when you stop to think about it, they weren't helped so much by the desktop aspects of linux, but server side aspects. In that line of reasoning, how much testing, bug reports, and fixes have they provided back to the kernel and relevant untilities to them? I honestly have no idea, but the areas in which Google would be 'paying back' their benefit of linux is in places very mundane and boring to the linux desktop market, and therefore for a great deal of users so low profile as to appear ungrateful despite efforts they may be making to really bolster the enterprise-capable aspects of Linux.

My bet is that they have made significant QA and development contributions back, simply because any large scale user of any technology contributes QA back, and if an open technology and they have technical skills available, they will be impatient enough to make progress in fixing it themselves.

All this aside, if nothing else consider the marketing leverage Google provides by advocates being able to point at google as a successful extremely large deployment of Linux. Not so significant nowadays since Linux is taken seriously, but when Google first started deploying with Linux, a great deal of the market still considered it unproven, and moves like Google's served to help convince skeptical would-be users that there is value and maturity in the Linux platform.

Amazed they have included Adobe Reader (1)

clive_p (547409) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416434)

I'm very surprised that they have chosen to include Adobe Reader V7, I've given up using it on Win XP as it is so bloated and slow, compared to older versions. I've switched to using the Foxit reader, which is equally closed source but also free, and works much better. Anyone else thing Adobe went badly down hill with their recent versions of Adobe Reader?

Re:Amazed they have included Adobe Reader (2, Insightful)

Zebra1024 (726970) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416504)

Adobe reader V7 is fine if you can wait the 20 minutes for it to start up. I also switched to Foxit reader which starts instantly and work fine for most of the PDF documents I read. There are some PDFs the Foxit does not format correctly and I have to go back to the Acrobat. Foxit saves me a ton of time especially when you click on a PDF link by accident.

Re:Amazed they have included Adobe Reader (1)

clive_p (547409) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416536)

Glad you agree that Foxit is much faster. But I find Adobe v7 slow even when it's started and I want to switch to a new document. On my laptop, especially, it takes ages to load the new file. I've found very few files that Foxit doesn't handle, but maybe I've been lucky.

no gtalk? (1)

lejerdemayn (823082) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416435)

how come no gtalk in the pack? it would be a great opportunity for google to attack the im market

Re:no gtalk? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416466)

You can add gtalk to the pack by using the add/remove programs link on the gpack page.

I think this is a big deal because it's getting folks used to google's app manager solution so that when the google OS comes out soon, they'll be more likely to try it.

Re:no gtalk? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416558)

When the Google OS comes out? Link me to that article, I'd love to read it.

Why Norton?! (2, Insightful)

Aminion (896851) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416455)

Why the heck did Google select the resource hog Norton? Norton is by far the most annoying and disfunctional AV on the market. I would have prefered NOD 32 or Kaspersky. They do their job very well and are resource efficient.

REAL PLAYER? (1)

Barkley44 (919010) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416460)

Everything else is great and I already have, but to install real player. I can't believe google included it. What a shame.

Re:REAL PLAYER? (1)

linuxci (3530) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416494)

Real player is not installed by default fortunately.

Thunderbird (1)

Aokubidaikon (942336) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416469)

Looks like Thunderbird was left out accidentally... NOT!

Google Philosophy (3, Interesting)

ignavusincognitus (750099) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416473)

2. It's best to do one thing really, really well.

This is a quote from the official "Google Philosophy" [google.com] page. Oh well.

2. It's best to do one thing really, really well.

Google does search. With one of the world's largest research groups focused exclusively on solving search problems, we know what we do well, and how we could do it better. Through continued iteration on difficult problems, we've been able to solve complex issues and provide continuous improvements to a service already considered the best on the web at making finding information a fast and seamless experience for millions of users. Our dedication to improving search has also allowed us to apply what we've learned to new products, including Gmail, Google Desktop, and Google Maps. As we continue to build new products* while making search better, our hope is to bring the power of search to previously unexplored areas, and to help users access and use even more of the ever-expanding information in their lives.

Leave me be... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416475)

Yet another corporate entity telling me what software I should be using...

since when does Google Earth run on linux ? (2, Interesting)

Ernest (4173) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416476)

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already
Who is that guy writing about ?
Any respectable /. user I know would run only Open Source Software
and would have nothing to do with anything needing a virus checker.

respectable /. user and Trillian? (1)

stesch (12896) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416480)

Is there a Linux/Unix version of Trillian I haven't heard of?

Respectable slashdot reader? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416486)

Any respectable slashot reader does not run Windows.

Respectable (4, Funny)

MS_is_the_best (126922) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416503)

Any respectable /. user should have most of this suite installed already (excluding a few things)

dpkg-query -S norton
dpkg: *norton* not found.

Guess I am not respectable ;-).

Gaaa (1)

gall0ws (902335) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416508)

Google Pack is only available for Windows XP

I want norton antivirus on my linux box!

frames on google (1)

thelost (808451) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416513)

can I be the first to say ugh, frames are bad mmmkay. there is absolutely no reason to need frames in a modern website and their appearance makes me hiss like a vampire. bad google, bad, down!

Nice thought ... (1)

sl0cb (934707) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416539)

It would be a lot cooler if you could customize this thing more. Have a bigger list of popular software titles and let me pick and choose maybe? Oh well ... delete

Good Work Google (2, Interesting)

l33tlamer (916010) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416545)

From http://pack.google.com/ [google.com] , this seems to be true AFAIK for many PC users:
- Essential: Enjoy safe, useful software for your computer
- Simple: Download and install everything in just a few clicks
- Customizable: Choose only the software you want
- Up to date: Get updates and new software via Google Updater

For the average user, who generally uses Windows, this is pretty sweet. No fuss, easy to use pack of "tools" that are easy to use and keep up-do-date. Sure, one can argue about having non-open source software in the pack, choice of Anti-virus software and so on. But, to the average PC user, all he or she cares about is having easy to use, maintainable software.

Instructions for Annoyed Downloads (2, Informative)

Gamzarme (799219) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416547)


Below is a proceedure that will change you life...

  1. Click link in article.
  2. Below the huge button that says DOWNLOAD GOOGLE PACK there is another link that takes you to a page
  3. Use this page to customize your download and use the following: (if you don't already have them..)

    • Google Earth
    • Picasa
    • Google Pack Screensaver
    • Google Desktop
    • Google Toolbar
    • Google Talk
    • Firefox
    • Ad-Aware
    • Adobe Reader
    • and Trillian (and get rid of those other three IM clients!!)

  4. Click the Download Button!!

Forced auto updates (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14416550)

From the eula:

"By installing the Software, you agree to automatically request and receive Updates."

Foxit (3, Interesting)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416551)

You can keep your Adobe (Acrobat) Reader. Way to heavy.
I've been using Foxit Reader [foxitsoftware.com] for a while now and it just works and it is fast.

Besides... the name is just great with one of the other tools in the Google pack: Firefox and Foxit ;)
Now we just needs a Foxbar, Deskfox, Fox-aware, Foxasa, Anti-fox (hmm, that doesn't sound good), Planetfox, Foxsaver.

Anyone can play this game. (5, Informative)

ettlz (639203) | more than 8 years ago | (#14416560)

OK, let's see... if I were running XP, I'd install ettlz's Essentials:

Network
  • Mozilla Firefox
  • Mozilla Thunderbird
  • SSH.com's SSH client
  • Gaim
Doing Work
  • OpenOffice.org
  • The GIMP
  • Inkscape
Utilities
  • 7-zip
  • jEdit
Multimedia
  • Winamp
  • CDex
  • aoTuV Vorbis encoder
  • Audacity
Security
  • ClamAV ClamWin
  • Spybot Search & Destroy
  • Lavasoft AdAware
  • Stern note about limited privilege accounts
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?