NeoKylin is the Linux OS China built to look like Windows XP

Status
Not open for further replies.
[url=http://arstechnica.co.uk/civis/viewtopic.php?p=29812205#p29812205:3sq7ez1s said:
blingting[/url]":3sq7ez1s]Weaning its IT sector off western software by developing an OS in partnership with a British company, followed by a custom version of an OS developed by an American company, both of which are based on the work of a Finn? Well you've got to start somewhere I suppose.

By creating their own distro, doesn't the distro automatically become theirs, as per FOSS rules?

It's also theirs from a practical standpoint, aka if they don't like something, they change it.
 
Upvote
5 (5 / 0)
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
[url=http://arstechnica.co.uk/civis/viewtopic.php?p=29812197#p29812197:15q1np4g said:
unequivocal[/url]":15q1np4g]At first this seemed like an interesting concept but then I began to understand how nutty it would be to rely on a piece of software that is maintained by the government that runs the great firewall and isn't exactly renowned for caring about privacy. It's kind of like running a distro rolled by the nsa..

It's worse than running a distro made by the NSA.

The NSA has actually provided some great security enhancements to Linux such as SELinux. These days it's easy to forget that their job is not just snooping but also to increase security of computer systems. I just wish they focused more on the latter.

Still, I wouldn't use their distro if they came out with one :)
 
Upvote
6 (6 / 0)

Marlor_AU

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
7,772
Subscriptor
Of course, just because NeoKylin ships on some of China's computers, that doesn’t mean that users aren't wiping it in favour of a Windows XP install at a later date—legally or otherwise.

You can be sure this is happening in almost every case. Even for corporate and government customers.

Even in government departments, IT is largely handled by users. Last time I visited China, I ended up being roped into helping a friend re-image a whole batch of computers that had been shipped to their office (of a large government department). Due to the current anti-Microsoft stance, they were shipped with Linux, while all the software they were expected to use was Windows-based.

The assumption was that the computers would be wiped, and a pirate version of Windows installed. The Government can claim that Linux is deployed on X% of computers... because it was installed at the point of procurement.

The level of IT oversight in China is shockingly bad. Users don't even use their government-provided email addresses at all. They just use webmail (e.g. 163.com). When I asked why, I was told: "The official email servers don't really work, and this way if we change jobs, we can keep our contacts and email history".

That wouldn't fly in most countries, that's for sure.
 
Upvote
2 (2 / 0)

Marlor_AU

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
7,772
Subscriptor
[url=http://arstechnica.co.uk/civis/viewtopic.php?p=29817913#p29817913:7mf7r5zd said:
oscarcharliezulu[/url]":7mf7r5zd]Other than making it easier to use for people who are familiar with WinXp but not Linux, what is the point if it can't run Windows executables.

I think it's just an attempt to get people to keep Linux on these computers, rather than immediately installing Windows (often Windows XP). The hope is that they will be comfortable enough with the look that they will give it a go, rather than immediately uninstalling.

Of course, that never works. The look may be the same, but the "feel" isn't. And there is no app compatibility.

Redhat tried a similar thing way back with Redhat 5.0 in 1997. I remember it shipping with FVWM95 as its default window manager, designed to look like Windows 95. It was a decent imitation, but the problem is that you end up in a sort of "uncanny valley". Things look familiar, but they behave in unexpected ways, because it's not Windows. That ends up making the OS even more alienating than it would be if it went with a distinctive UI.
 
Upvote
5 (5 / 0)

Marlor_AU

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
7,772
Subscriptor
[url=http://arstechnica.co.uk/civis/viewtopic.php?p=29818589#p29818589:2m1iuay9 said:
Ailurophobe[/url]":2m1iuay9]This probably sounds dumb, but where is the "red dragon logo" mentioned in the article? All I see is the "red unicorn". Well technically "kirin", not a western unicorn. Maybe the fact the OS has "kylin" in the name is misleading me, but it really looks more like a unicorn than a dragon to me...

A qilin is a qilin. I wouldn't say it's a unicorn. Qilin often have two horns, and aren't horse-like at all.

A qilin is more of a cross between a dragon and a giraffe.

The similarity between qilins and dragons is pretty strong throughout Chinese history. They both have similar heads, scales, etc. The association with unicorns seems more of a modern thing.
 
Upvote
1 (1 / 0)
Status
Not open for further replies.