I think i want to try linux out

[PerennialII]

hmmm... Ubuntu live-cd can read/write every filesystem he could be using - so he can backup / fix everything if the partitions are ok (and even send it to other computers in a network or upload his files to website)... and if the partitions get screwed he can use parted or fdisk.

what else do you need a rescue disk for? assuming it's not a hardware failure you want to diagnose.

yeah, would think live cds do a good job in most cases, but when a system 'really' crashes the tools contained in "rescue disks" can be invaluable when the "panic hits".

Arguably, computers without dvd drives don't deserve rescuing. :p

Knoppix still has the cd version sure, but the dvd has so many goodies .

 

[Quadruple Bypass]

well good and bad news, they will be replacing my computer. now more than likely, it will be coming with windows vista :(

 

[fargoth]

I don't see how another gift OS (be it as bad as vista) is bad news... you can easily remove it and install whatever you like.

unless you pay for it.. in which case they can't make you do it (can they?).

 

[Quadruple Bypass]

I don't see how another gift OS (be it as bad as vista) is bad news... you can easily remove it and install whatever you like.

unless you pay for it.. in which case they can't make you do it (can they?).

no I am just worried that ill get hooked on vista and won't give linux a shot.

 

[fargoth]

no I am just worried that ill get hooked on vista and won't give linux a shot.

I don't think trying linux out should be a move motivated -only- from the fact that you don't like your MS OS.
even when it was not good enough to be a replacement for the desktop user, I enjoyed trying different distributions out just to learn new things, and see the advancement over time... (i also tried BeOS when it was still alive, and the variants of BSD, and tried every user interface i heard about...)

with that said, apart from it's nice interface, vista has some very annoying behavior... I'll give you one example (the one that eventually got my friend to install XP over vista) we tried to watch a movie on a pc with vista - and it lagged - this computer had a E6700 processor, 4 GB of ram and geforce 8800 gts 320mb... true, it was also sharing files via bittorrent, but i can do both things on my p4 1.5ghz with 512 ram and have no lags at all with whatever operating system - apart from vista...
and there are these posts around news sites (not just reader's comments, actual news items) which report vista locks itself because it thinks your vista is not genuine when you replace a video card... just google it up, vista has lots of bad press around it.

oh, and i find maintaining Ubuntu is much easier for me.. i don't have to deal with spyware (and most "freeware" for windows contain unpleasant surprises) , and installation of applications and libraries is much easier... as a developer on windows, i find myself compiling many libraries on my own (with many different mechanisms) - it's even worse then it used to be for linux before i got to know apt...

 

[neutrino]

I don't think trying linux out should be a move motivated -only- from the fact that you don't like your MS OS.

with that said, apart from it's nice interface, vista has some very annoying behavior

Obviously he hasn't seen Compiz-Fusion yet. (Frankly, I haven't had the opportunity to try it out, either, because my computer has such crappy hardware. ) Quadruple, if it's just the looks and visual gimmicks that you think might steer you towards Vista, Ubuntu can be made to look like almost any OS's interface you want. As I mentioned in another post, 'Mac'ish and 'Vista'ish looks are very popular. And here's Compiz in action.

oh, and i find maintaining Ubuntu is much easier for me.. i don't have to deal with spyware (and most "freeware" for windows contain unpleasant surprises) , and installation of applications and libraries is much easier... as a developer on windows, i find myself compiling many libraries on my own (with many different mechanisms) - it's even worse then it used to be for linux before i got to know apt...

I love apt-getting stuff! :!)

 

[Quadruple Bypass]

:D haha. yea after reading some of the problems for vista, ill still do it. i hope vista isn't like windows ME all over again (LOL). I am going to install ubuntu so my next question is how do i shorten the amount of default time on the OS choosing screen and the default OS? i remember doing it 5 yrs ago, but i don't remember how.

 

[fargoth]

you just edit /boot/grub/menu.lst
you can only save it as a super user (root privileges), and Ubuntu is one of the few distributions which don't have a root account by default (for security reasons).
so, you just type:
sudo gedit /boot/grub/menu.lst

comments are marked with # (so the lines beginning with # do nothing but document)
the first two uncommented entries are:
default and timeout - i think you'll know what to do with them =P

by the way, compiz works great on my 6 years old computer, it's even more responsive then metacity. (which is gnome's default window manager - you use it if you choose not to use compiz in Ubuntu)
in fact, the only window manager that felt "lighter" to me was e17 - and it lacks the functionality of gnome, and the beauty of compiz (though it's pretty nice looking too...)

I've also heard about laptop such as ibm T30 that manage to run Ubuntu with compiz (although the one who said it also said it started working very slow for him after upgrading to 7.10... but i guess you can fix it)

the spec for T30 is:
1.8-GHz/1.2-GHz Pentium 4-M, 256MB of DDR266 SDRAM, and ATI Mobility Radeon 7500 AGP with 16MB of DDR SDRAM.

 

[neutrino]

Quadruple, if you are new to Ubuntu, you should have this site bookmarked - VERY useful.

by the way, compiz works great on my 6 years old computer, it's even more responsive then metacity. (which is gnome's default window manager - you use it if you choose not to use compiz in Ubuntu)
in fact, the only window manager that felt "lighter" to me was e17 - and it lacks the functionality of gnome, and the beauty of compiz (though it's pretty nice looking too...)

I've also heard about laptop such as ibm T30 that manage to run Ubuntu with compiz (although the one who said it also said it started working very slow for him after upgrading to 7.10... but i guess you can fix it)

the spec for T30 is:
1.8-GHz/1.2-GHz Pentium 4-M, 256MB of DDR266 SDRAM, and ATI Mobility Radeon 7500 AGP with 16MB of DDR SDRAM.

I have an S3 ProSavage DDR - even Ubuntu knows that it's not worth the trouble messing around with Compiz. I tried enabling Desktop Effects in Feisty, but it was no good.

 

[fargoth]

oh, and after getting used to running linux as a simple user, I recommend you start learning to do the real magic.
what really makes linux so powerful is shell scripting (though many people prefer python nowadays for it's prettier syntax and the power a full blown programming language offers).

i'll just give you an example of what you can do with it:
(this shell script is a gnome specific script, just to impress you with some GUI =P)

http://g-scripts.sourceforge.net/nautilus-scripts/Multimedia/Video/video-convert

just follow the instructions at the beginning of the script.
copy and paste it into a file at /home/YourUserName/.gnome2/nautilus-scripts
to make it executable you need to type chmod +x ScripName
or right click it, choose properties and under permissions check the allow execute as a program...

if you want to learn bash scripting, you can look here:
http://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/

 

[Thrice]

I have an S3 ProSavage DDR - even Ubuntu knows that it's not worth the trouble messing around with Compiz. I tried enabling Desktop Effects in Feisty, but it was no good.

I can't imagine doing without beryl anymore. Try sabayon on it see if the livecd works.

 

[Quadruple Bypass]

hey guys, me again. ubuntu website asks:

What type of computer do you have?
-Standard personal computer (x86 architecture, PentiumTM, CeleronTM, AthlonTM, SempronTM)
-64bit AMD and Intel computers

if i get a Satellite A135-S4499 laptop with a core 2 duo processor, which version do i get? i would assume 64, but i don't want my computer to explode or something so i ask you guys lol :)

im also going with 7.10 instead of 6.06, would anyone advise against this?

 

[fargoth]

go with 7.10, and if you got less then 4GB of RAM there's no real advantage as far as i know for using 64bit... and the disadvantage would be no adobe flash (only the free ones got versions for 64bit, and they aren't that great yet...), and your programs will take more memory...

you can use both 32, and 64bit... but 32bit has more software precompiled (and sometimes that's the only software there is, when it comes to commercial software).

 

[PerennialII]

In daily use the difference probably isn't that pronounced and a 32 bit system can probably be a bit easier to handle. In math intensive benchmarks, if you'd be doing something like "high-performance computing" or overall something which really makes your system work, 64 bit systems excel and would definitely recommend a 64 bit install (if you've something running in 'native' 64 bit). Running 32 bit appls on a 64 bit OS as far as know doesn't lead to performance decrease should be worried about. 64 bit ones have some extra issues occasionally, but it seems like so do 32 ones (been running 64 bit systems as long as they've been on the market and personally don't think there really are any more "issues" than in 32 bit systems). For example the firefox problems are resolved running the 32 bit one in a 64 bit OS, with the flash and all works without missing a beat.

 

[Quadruple Bypass]

Hey guys, i just got my replacement computer today, and i got screwed over by toshiba. they didnt send the recovery cd with the computer and when i called them they said i can buy it from them for 40 bucks (no thanks a-holes). can i still install ubuntu without losing vista?

edit: i meant because of the partitions

 

[PerennialII]

With 99.99% prob yes (which means barring any unforeseen unusual unexpected glitch ) ... typically it's quite a bit easier to 1st install win and then linux, linux can handle setting up the bootloader for multiboot without any "issues" unlike win. Before you can do the install need 'just' to get your partitions in order (or if your ubuntu install media has the tools for it, like "gparted" so that you can repartition if need to during the install process without cleaning the system). So is the whole drive in one piece + if some of you ubuntu guys could say a word whether the install media for ubuntu has the partition tools included [RH rules! ]?

 

[Quadruple Bypass]

well i did it. ubuntu is installed and running. i had some sound problems (a135 toshiba satellite) but i quickly went to google and found a lot of people had the same problem. took me a while, but i fixed it :) i am loving it so far.

 

[PerennialII]

...way to go! After a while you'll notice ( ) a growing urge to re-format your windows partition and add the space to your linux install (which you can do seamlessly in linux without new weird drive letters of course), perhaps having a virtual machine of a windows install somewhere for those weak moments when may need the thing for some "trivial" task.

 

[neutrino]

Congrats!

 

[Link-]

Hi,

I'm also trying to start using linux, but I wan't to know if I could install linux in an external hard drive.

I want to have windows on the internal harddrive and the linux in the external hard drive and when ever I want to use linux connect the external hd and use it.

My other question is, can I make two partitions on the external hd, one for Win files not related to any OS and the other for linux OS?


Thanks
-Link

 

[PerennialII]

Yes - and it's a neat way of doing it while preserving your original system. There is the requirement that your hardware (BIOS) needs to be able to boot from the external drive, usb/firewire/esata or whatever you might be using. "Relatively recent" systems shouldn't have a problem, you can check this by entering BIOS when starting your system and checking the boot order (and while you're at it make sure the external drive is ahead of your internal HDD).

And yes, you can naturally make 2 partitions to your external drive and install linux to the other, linux distros don't necessarily take up much space at all (I've one with me in a usb stick at all times ). You can do the partitioning when doing the linux install, from your existing system, or then use a specialized tool like gparted or partition magic.

And probably a good idea to make sure you've backups of your system and overall make sure you don't "confuse" the drives while you're at it .

 

[Link-]

Yes - and it's a neat way of doing it while preserving your original system. There is the requirement that your hardware (BIOS) needs to be able to boot from the external drive, usb/firewire/esata or whatever you might be using. "Relatively recent" systems shouldn't have a problem, you can check this by entering BIOS when starting your system and checking the boot order (and while you're at it make sure the external drive is ahead of your internal HDD).

And yes, you can naturally make 2 partitions to your external drive and install linux to the other, linux distros don't necessarily take up much space at all (I've one with me in a usb stick at all times ). You can do the partitioning when doing the linux install, from your existing system, or then use a specialized tool like gparted or partition magic.

And probably a good idea to make sure you've backups of your system and overall make sure you don't "confuse" the drives while you're at it .

Thanks for the help.

I will try then linux.

 

[PerennialII]

... the "infestation" spreads . If you google something like 'installing linux on usb' you'll likely find a couple of tutorials you can review beforehand (or 'installing fedora on usb' in my case).