| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM)Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM)Posted Jul 4, 2008 7:42 UTC (Fri) by luya (subscriber, #50741)In reply to: Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) by mattdm Parent article: Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM)
Yes it does which is no different than Berry Linux, Fox Linux or Linx XP to name a few.
(Log in to post comments)
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) Posted Jul 4, 2008 8:13 UTC (Fri) by rvfh (subscriber, #31018) [Link] The article said that you could use it with a clear conscience, which to me meant no proprietary drivers. Would you mind telling us which proprietary drivers are being used? And where you found the info? I was hopping it would be an all-Intel device, and thus would use only free drivers...
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) Posted Jul 4, 2008 17:16 UTC (Fri) by luya (subscriber, #50741) [Link] Right about Lite Version. Media Center 2.0 uses codecs for DVD playback support.
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) Posted Jul 4, 2008 11:09 UTC (Fri) by mattdm (subscriber, #18) [Link] "Yes it does add binary-only drivers", you mean? And, to be blunt, why should I care that this is no different from a list of minor distributions? I don't want to run a random minor distribution.
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) Posted Jul 4, 2008 17:08 UTC (Fri) by luya (subscriber, #50741) [Link] Linpus Linux is very well-known in China and Taiwan. A simple visit to their website should provide you more details.
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) Posted Jul 4, 2008 17:48 UTC (Fri) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] The site looks pathetic. "Legal" and "Privacy" links are imitations, FAQ is empty, search is not functional. The bug tracking system is nowhere to be seen. And most importantly, the site doesn't even mention security updates!
|
|
||||||||||||