linux

[PC eye]

What I am talking about is using Windows orientate software for MS optical mice/keyboards and others like Logitech with programmable input devices and only seeing their softwares work on Windows. I imagine after this amount of time some software programmers working on the various distros have managed to tweak things into the newer releases.

In just the last few years many things have been added into the various "flavors" of Linux to attract more MS or Apple/Mac users into trying it. But when you set your system up with mainly MS type devices like optical mice and still can't connect online with any distro it can just as easily turn you away from relying on Linux as a main OS. The dsl adapter here uses a usb port with Linux drivers available from the ISP That can make you under the collar when you have intentions to try out various distros!

 

[amosf]

What I am talking about is using Windows orientate software for MS optical mice/keyboards and others like Logitech with programmable input devices and only seeing their softwares work on Windows. I imagine after this amount of time some software programmers working on the various distros have managed to tweak things into the newer releases.

Ah yes, that is always a problem. Some tablets and extra button mice can be a pain of course.

The dsl adapter here uses a usb port with Linux drivers available from the ISP That can make you under the collar when you have intentions to try out various distros!

You certainly need to spend more time planing the home net with linux I think. If it's set up right then it's easy, but you can just go get whatever you want and expect it to work easy.

Once I have the modem to smoothwall/router to switch set right, including dhcp, then all the rest is easy and the XP and linux boxes work out of the box on a default install (assuming you buy all compatible hardware).

There are pros and cons with all the OS's and distros, of course, and I like the pros of linux for general use and then am willing to deal with the cons of windows when I use it for other things. And vice versa

 

[PC eye]

The thing here was the same dls drivers used for 98 work well on Vista now being run along with XP. I currently have the MS compatible version of FireFox and Thundebird on both version without a hitch.

Besides the dsl problem the pros for Linux point at one thing Windows won't see namely being able to install a dsitro randomly on any VFat partition created and not worrying about one distro replacing another by default upgrade just because one is newer then the other. Vista on the other hand goes right after the first primary when trying to dual boot with that going on a second primary. Har! It will grab the first!

 

[2048Megabytes]

After trying out Linux for a week I am hooked. I am dual booting with Ubuntu 7.10 and find startup and shutdown speeds are faster than my Windows XP. Linux runs stable and is a sweet operating system!

Windows XP Home Edition 32-bit is a good operating system and has some advantages over Ubuntu which is why I will continue to dual boot. Those who haven't experienced a Linux operating system I would encourage you to give one a try.

 

[diroga]

@dmaksimov

did you figure out what distro to use?

 

[PC eye]

After trying out Linux for a week I am hooked. I am dual booting with Ubuntu 7.10 and find startup and shutdown speeds are faster than my Windows XP. Linux runs stable and is a sweet operating system!

Windows XP Home Edition 32-bit is a good operating system and has some advantages over Ubuntu which is why I will continue to dual boot. Those who haven't experienced a Linux operating system I would encourage you to give one a try.

Linux doesn't have all of the processes to load that are seen in Windows. XP was Microsoft's "gem" when it first came out being able to reach the desktop faster then any previous version was the boast there. That is until you look at 3.1 that loaded faster then 9X-ME.

Linux for the most part lacks the clutter there. And once you have a distro configured it should be stable since the programs are more basic in design seeing far less driver/resource conflicts. Windows on the other hand needs examination to see the pros and cons of each version despite the ME flop.

 

[2048Megabytes]

Linux doesn't have all of the processes to load that are seen in Windows.

I figured the reason my Linux operating system is running more efficiently is because Ubuntu has less software to deal with than Windows. Obviously there is far more software available for Windows XP then there is for Ubuntu. There are programs I run on Windows XP that I can't run on Ubuntu which is why I will keep both operating systems. Both have there positives and negatives.

 

[Motoxrdude]

The thing here was the same dls drivers used for 98 work well on Vista now being run along with XP. I currently have the MS compatible version of FireFox and Thundebird on both version without a hitch.

Besides the dsl problem the pros for Linux point at one thing Windows won't see namely being able to install a dsitro randomly on any VFat partition created and not worrying about one distro replacing another by default upgrade just because one is newer then the other. Vista on the other hand goes right after the first primary when trying to dual boot with that going on a second primary. Har! It will grab the first!

im sorry but use some commas in your posts! its super hard to understand what in the world you are trying to say when your forget the leave out all the commas!

 

[arisejesus]

I figured the reason my Linux operating system is running more efficiently is because Ubuntu has less software to deal with than Windows. Obviously there is far more software available for Windows XP then there is for Ubuntu. There are programs I run on Windows XP that I can't run on Ubuntu which is why I will keep both operating systems. Both have there positives and negatives.

well, i have no problems running windows application on winehq, the only problem is with games but cedega can solve these problems. basically, in linux, software are opensource and i strongly belive that there is a linux application that can substitute windows application, refer to link

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/W...ts?highlight=%28window%29%7C%28application%29

i dual boot windows XP and linux, linux is my main OS and i haven boot into my XP for a year already. i feel linux is more capable of multi-tasking which windows cant do it without flawlessly. windows do have its pro's also

 

[PC eye]

im sorry but use some commas in your posts! its super hard to understand what in the world you are trying to say when your forget the leave out all the commas!

For one I am still able to use the same drivers for dsl used on 98SE on Vista. Once connected online Windows will simply search for the latest version.

The other item pointed out there is that you don't have to worry when going to install a second or third and even newer version of the same distro with Linux like you would with Windows wanting to automatically replace the older version as part of it's upgrade process. You can run various distros on extended partitions as well as the primary type.

 

[porterjw]

I figured the reason my Linux operating system is running more efficiently is because Ubuntu has less software to deal with than Windows.

Sort of. The way it handles processes is a bit different. As far as booting goes, try pressing 'e' after highlighting the Ubuntu option when at GRUB, then moving to the first 'kernel' line and press 'e' again, then type 'profile (no quotes) at the end of the line. Super slow boot afterwards, but let everything load up and wait about 2 minutes. Reboot into Ubuntu and watch it fly through I cut about 7 seconds off the boot time afterwards.

 

[arisejesus]

I figured the reason my Linux operating system is running more efficiently is because Ubuntu has less software to deal with than Windows. Obviously there is far more software available for Windows XP then there is for Ubuntu. There are programs I run on Windows XP that I can't run on Ubuntu which is why I will keep both operating systems. Both have there positives and negatives.

well, even if ur windows and linux have an equivalent software to run, linux would be faster because linux's application does not eat up so much of memory. and linux OS itself uses much less memory resource compared to windows