Posted on 04/29/2006 11:34:36 PM PDT by bigdcaldavis
Linspire Announces 'Freespire' Version of Their Popular Linux Operating System
Freespire Community Project to Offer Unique Mix of Both Proprietary and Open Source Options in Free Linux Operating System
SAN DIEGO, April 24, 2006 - Linspire, developer of the popular commercial desktop Linux operating system of the same name, today announced plans for a no-cost version of their operating system called Freespire. Kevin Carmony, Linspire's President and CEO, unveiled the Freespire project in his keynote address this morning at the 4th Annual Desktop Linux Summit, running today and tomorrow in San Diego. In his remarks, Carmony explained how Freespire is a community driven and developed project, but unique for open source Linux distributions in that it will allow users the choice to download a version that is 100% open-source or one that includes proprietary software.
Freespire is venturing into new territory by offering a free community Linux operating system that includes the option for legally licensed proprietary software pieces in the core distribution. The Freespire community project and Web site are now live at www.freespire.org, with the first beta release of the operating system to be made available for download in August. The release will mark the first time Linspire is making such a free version of their Linux operating system available to the public. For more details on the Freespire project or to sign up for the Freespire community mailing list, visit www.freespire.org.
Linux has found broad acceptance on servers but has met with some resistance from desktop and laptop computer users, in part from its lack of native support for some hardware, file types and multi media formats. Freespire addresses this hurdle by offering proprietary drivers and software as a choice, and gives desktop Linux users the option of "out-of-the-box" legal support for MP3, DVD, Windows Media, QuickTime, Java, Flash, Real, ATI drivers, nVidia drivers, Adobe Acrobat Reader, third-party fonts, and so on. Other Linux distributions do not include these pieces of proprietary software in their core free distributions.
Once released, a list of all the different proprietary codecs, drivers and software used in Freespire will be available at www.freespire.org/home/trademarks, along with the detailed licensing information needed to help assist others in the modifying and redistribution of the core Freespire open source code.
In his remarks at the Desktop Linux Summit, Carmony discussed how the open source Linux community needs to become better educated on how to legally and successfully incorporate proprietary licensing in those instances where there are not yet good open source options available.
"Freespire is about choice," Carmony said. "The user should be free to decide what software they want to install on their systems, be that proprietary or open source. Linspire fully embraces and supports the open source model, but if Linux is to gain mainstream acceptance, it needs to work with iPods and DVD players, and fully support hardware, such as 3D graphic cards, Wi-Fi, sound, and printers. Until there are viable open source replacements, Freespire sets out to at least provide the option of legally and easily using certain proprietary codecs, drivers and software."
According to Carmony, the Freespire project has six major goals for the advancement of Linux and open source software:
1) Provide users freedom of choice by making available a "free marketplace" for all Linux software, including proprietary, open source, free and commercial products, plus provide easy access to this marketplace with open sourced tools such as CNR and apt-get. When necessary for the user experience, include proprietary software as an option in the core distribution, which will always be available for download at no cost;
2) Offer a very easy-to-use, yet powerful, Linux distribution;
3) Provide exceptional "fit and finish" with a professional and polished operating system;
4) Create a Linux that can expand more broadly to the masses;
5) Create an active community of developers and users;
6) Include worldwide language support.
A more detailed discussion on the Freespire mission can be found at www.freespire.org/about/vision.
As part of the Freespire project, Linspire's flagship CNR (click and run) technology (a one-click download and install software management system), will be open sourced to facilitate the building of a truly "free marketplace" for all Linux software, including proprietary, open source, free, or commercial. Many proprietary codecs, drivers and software will be offered in Freespire's core distribution, while a few that have a larger per-unit licensing fee, such as DVD, must be purchased and installed via CNR.
The Freespire project will be open to community development, comment and contribution. A community forum is now live on the Freespire Web site, and the community project will be governed by a Leadership Board that includes prominent members of the Linux community. For more about the Freespire Leadership board, visit www.freespire.org/community/leadership.
As a company, Linspire will continue to develop and release new commercial versions of its industry leading desktop Linux operating system Linspire OS. While Freespire is more accessible by developers and those in or curious about the Linux community, Linspire will continue to be geared towards the consumer and novice computer user, offering more ease of use and premium support. In addition, the Freespire project will help to improve the commercial version of the Linspire operating system, as many of the improvements to the Freespire operating system will be incorporated into future releases of Linspire.
A detailed FAQ on Freespire is available at www.freespire.org/support/faqs.
About Linspire, Inc.
Linspire, Inc. ( www.linspire.com) was founded in 2001 to bring choice into the operating system market. The company's flagship product, the Linspire operating system, is an affordable, easy-to-use Linux-based operating system for home, school, and business users. Linspire pioneered CNR ("click and run") Technology, which allows Linspire users access to thousands of software programs, each of which can be downloaded and installed with just one mouse click. The more than 2,400 software titles available in the CNR Warehouse (www.linspire.com/cnr) include full office and productivity suites, games, multimedia players, photo management software, accounting tools, and more.
For more information, please contact:
Heather MacKenzie Linspire, Inc. 858-587-6700, ext. 263 858-587-8095 Fax p...@linspireinc.com
I challenge you to find one statement of fact there about an SCO case that wasn't backed up by the court documents that are always posted. Groklaw is the best resource for information on these cases.
If Groklaw is such a joke, then was was SCO scared? SCO put up their own case resource pages to "counter" Groklaw, but it failed, since you can't counter facts with the same facts that are against you. In fact, SCO used Groklaw-produced documents on their own site (without giving credit to those who did the work, of course) while publicly trashing Groklaw. SCO also conspicuously misses posting damaging or embarrassing documents -- before it was the DaimlerChyrsler loss, now it's the "What the hell is taking so long" conversation with the judge in the Red Hat case. Groklaw has the transcript of the latter, SCO doesn't.
Groklaw has also served as an investigative resource, and has produced factual information quite damaging to SCO's case. For example, SCO said they didn't know IBM was doing AIX on POWER and wanted to make IBM's doing AIX on POWER part of their complaint, but Groklaw found SCO's own press releases touting AIX on POWER from long before the suit was brought. SCO was not allowed to bring that complaint.
The only thing you can claim about Groklaw is bias in the editorial, but you cannot claim lies or distortion of facts.
"you know good and well ShadowAce and others constantly link Jokelaw..."
We weren't talking about ShadowAce. We were talking about people who constantly link to Stallman.com, and you win that little contest, hands down. In fact, you're the undisputed champion of that. Constantly repeating but failing to prove is simply your standard way of admitting how much you continue to talk out of your a$$ on a daily basis.
"and one of your first posts to me ever..."
That's right. One post. If you think I'm wrong, again, you're more than welcome (and encouraged) to provide proof. You won't because you can't, and you know it. How many times have you linked to Stallman.com? How much traffic have you sent his way? Did you ever find any proof that I linked to anything Stallman other than the one time? No? Didn't think so. You remain a joke.
Give it up. You're trying to make a point, but the only one we see is on top of your head.
HA! How about the time SCO was being hit by denial of service attacks? Jokelaw claimed SCO was lying, and once the attacks were verified as real that they were even launching attacks on themselves. Of course a couple days later Eric Raymond admitted it was someone from the open source commmunity, to no surprise to anyone outside it.
Of course we do, because that's where the facts are. ShadowAce's latest posting from Groklaw had links to the document. And unlike SCO, Groklaw collates links to other relevant documents so you can better understand what's going on. That's probably why SCO doesn't do that -- better understanding makes SCO look bad.
http://www.stallman.org
And I'm going to keep linking it too, since people need to know what a fanatical leftist is behind the license of 80% of all open source software. If guys like me weren't around you'd still be linking it as the gospel.
Yes, you are going to keep linking to it, because it's easier to link to that than to anything that proves your wildly inaccurate allegations about me.
My original statement still stands, then. And you've just admitted that you were who I am talking about.
There's nothing wild about the fact that your first couple of posts to me were you linking the radical leftist's site to try to counter something I said. You were wrong in your argument then, too, of course.
Going for a tangent again?
Initial evidence pointed to something fishy, for example, they claimed to be getting a SYN flood, but no other servers on that subnet were affected (all would be down with a script kiddie attack, but this one was far more sophisticated than imagined at the time). Given SCO's documented history of lies, most people didn't put faking a DDOS for sympathy beyond them.
And Groklaw posted updates on the subject, admitting the DDOS was real. Honest people do that, so you wouldn't understand.
But that has nothing to do with the law in the cases, which you cannot challenge.
Of course a couple days later Eric Raymond admitted it was someone from the open source commmunity, to no surprise to anyone outside it.
Just because SCO acts dishonestly doesn't mean I think all software companies are like them.
And let me guess, you only read SCO's letter, which lied about the facts. I bet you still think Eric Raymond knew who the attacker was.
We're up to 80% now? And although you never were honest and retracted your previous statements, it appears now you no longer claim that Stallman has the copyright to all that software.
Of course, you've reverted back to lies before, so I wouldn't be surprised if you did it again.
It's the old debate of "free as in free speech" vs. "free as in beer". Certain codecs cannot be legally included unless royalties are paid to the intellectual creators/owners of said codecs. MP3 codecs are subject to this. And DVD codecs? Fuggedabouddit. Of course you can use Google to search for libdvdcss (in DEB Debian package format or RPM RedHat package format), but would you get in trouble for having that on your computer if Big Brother decides he has the right to search your hand drive for ANY illegal content and finds libdvdcss? Chances are yes because the stance the copyright police are taking these days is "mere possession of one single illegal music/software/movies is a federal offense", and the DMCA software (and it's proposed sequel DMCA II) were created simply to kiss the entertainment industry's collective ass.
The Stallman-quoting flamer........makes you wish the FreeRepublic forums included a "twit filter" option.
There is something wild about you having a question about the GPL, and me providing excerpts from the GPL, and then you portraying me as a Stallmanite, especially since you can produce no other posts where I link to Stallman, and I can produce numerous posts where you do.
Of course, don't let a little thing like logic or facts get in your way. You never do.
Keep spinning. You're not really saying anything about me, only about yourself, and it's hilarious that you don't even realize it.
We're all laughing at you.
LOL you're the one who claimed 80% of all open source uses the radical leftist license, not me.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1584107/posts?page=92#92
No different than Flamer, who complains about my links to the leftist site when some of the first posts he ever replied to me were linking it LMAO! You boys would like to run and hide now but you obviously can't, since you've been parroting and protecting Stallman all along.
If you can read this pos you are using software that uses stalmans license..
Lie. You don't even read the posts you link to. I said "I've heard up to 80%" in response to your %73 claim. I myself never claimed that number.
As I said then, I'd like to know where the stats come from. One source of OSS is SourceForge, which in the software search gives 73869 total projects (yet that conflicts with the 100,000+ claimed, so I'm probably missing something), of which 49894 are GPL and 8754 are LGPL. This actually gives 58648, about %79 at SourceForge, but not in the world in general.
Yeah, it was, whem you tried to claim no knowledge of where that figure came from, when as my link showed you were the actual source!
The link is no longer good. You can't support your claim. But I can support my claim that I did not claim 80% as you said I did. As usual, you lie.
LMAO, the link works perfect! You simply can't help but try to lie your way out of everything, can you.
I put my record of posting from Stallman.com up against yours any day. Any reason why you ignore the fact that you post from there on a regular basis, as I documented here?:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1624046/posts?page=16#16
You found one post from FSF where I was explaining the GPL, and you take that single post, which said nothing about Stallman, to paint me as a Stallmanite, while you continually project on others to hide the fact that you are actually steering a lot of people toward his site, no matter what you say your intentions are.
I'm beginning to get a full picture of you now. You love UN law usurping US sovereignty, via DMCA and the other UN "inspired" laws. You love steering people toward Stallman.com, and you love Microsoft's policy of dumping money hand over fist into China. You also support Planned Parenthood and offer a feeble dismissal when confronted with the fact that your money goes directly to the leftist causes and mine does not.
You are a leftist, through and through. There's overwhelming evidence pointing in that direction, and I can document all of it.
And so, when you attack, you are DEFINITELY projecting. You are a sad, sad little man, GE. You really need to give up the message board and find some real human companionship.
Looks to me like he's lying. He's desperately trying to twist your words into something he can argue with, rather than trying to argue with the facts (because if that happened, the argument would be over in two seconds).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.