Converting from Windows to Linux

[WanderingKnight]

Maybe WanderingKnight really doesn't want to know what contract rates are for computer or network support work.

Yeah, well, in my country, 400 dollars for 20 hours makes you a very, very rich person in little time

But anyways, come on, get yourself up and don't be lazy. Making your head think from time to time is a good thing (it can even burn fat!). The "lazy, easy" users may be okay with one-two click actions, but most of those users won't even bother spending more than 15 minutes a day in front of the PC. Once you take a day to learn command line (ANYONE can learn it, just as anyone can learn highschool math), and drop any pretensions of playing games (unless of course you keep an XP box around), I'm sure it'll feel like smooth sailing, even for average, non-power users (I'm not a power user myself).

[Ending]

The process for downloading VLC is just as easy in Ubuntu as it is in Windows (if not easier).

Actually, no, it isn't. Or at least not with several programs I tried while using Mandriva. See my previous post. To clarify, here is how I experienced it:

1) Okay, the OS is running pretty fine in its own partition and the welcome screen looks pretty nifty. I had even taken some time to customize my desktop to look like the one in my sig, thanks to the more advanced customization options available. Since Internet worked out-of-package too, I headed straight to www.freshmeat.net, of which I had known for some time as a source of Linux software.

2) Wow, so many good looking media-players. This shouldn't be a problem at all. Hmm...
"--if you have libdvdcss installed--" Nope.
"Installing from RPM packages without yum or apt-get." Yum-yum is a condom-brand, right?
"Freevo has a large number of dependencies." That ain't good.
"If you don't have access to yum, you'll have to install each of the dependencies manually." Oh, boy! 2+ hours of work! Exactly what I love to get some silly player to work!
"GeeXboX has to be compiled under GNU/Linux. Also, you may need some packages." Compiled? Sounds kinda geeKy.. Oh, and the packages may have to be compiled too...

3) 20+ hours later, after installing an RPM-package, compiling several packages to get the damn thing to work at all, failing video-driver compilation, not finding drivers for soundcard, and using several hours to find some kind of info as to what to do, user X (me!) decides to give up, since the use of the OS has become more work than worth. None of the media-players work like they should either, too often referring to some 3rd-party site to install even more stuff that should had been included in the first place.

4) Format, install WinXP, install software, tweak, and play. Zero problems and no BS. At least if it is a haxx0red version.

[Vexx]

Wow... sounds more a slam on Mandriva (which I've not tried as a distro).
Same experience with recent Ubuntu:
1) sound worked on Ubuntu install (thats a new thing for me )
1.5) video and X config worked on install (more often than not on random h/w anymore)
2) had to turn on "universe access" for packages.
3) Ran Synaptics manager which automagically patches everything.
4) Selected a media player (the default is sucky, go fig).
5) Synaptics automagically acquired and installed everything (warned and asked about each pkg)
6) Done, worked --- (though the particular media player I selected had a UI I wasn't ultra fond of). Played DVDs... played anime files after installing codecs.

So.. not perfect but somewhere between your experience and "my dog could do it" (which Windows also fails at, particularly with codec management though the CCCP group has done a lot in that area in the last year).

I also noticed you left out all the fun details with XP .... find drivers (listen to XP scream about them), find software ("whats a codec, son?"), figure out how to tweak (are those english words next to the checkbox?), figure out how to optimize (gamma...... isn't that dangerous?)

I guess what I'm really trying to say is that both sides tend to get a bit hyperbolic --- there's enough independent study to show that Windows isn't actually "easier" so much as just years of putting up with it have people more used to the paradigms. Linux still isn't "easy" but its gotten "easier".

I still liken a PC to owning a car in the early 20th century ... you're buying a vehicle that will spend a certain percentage of its time in pieces in the front yard, you need a toolkit and possibly access to a machine shop. I don't care if its Windows, Linux, or BeOS. Some people would rather buy a Japanese Maxima with the hood screwed down and service contract (typically a Mac) but they're going to give up certain installation and task options in exchange for it "just working".

[cyth]

As far as prebuilds are concerned that are available throught package managers, they're a much much easier ride than finding that .exe on the internet and installing it after download.

SuSE's Smart just blows any kind of Windows installation method away, where you only need to input a search name, select it and install it. The whole process simplifies acquiring dependencies as it downloads them automatically. I haven't really used Synaptic in Ubuntu that much, but I believe it's a pretty straightforward program after you enable some functions that aren't defaulted.

Anyway, best advice was already given: Stop imagining that Linux will work similarly to Windows. The GUI will work the same and you can accomplish a lot with it, but indeed, terminal/command line/console is your friend.

@Ledgem: Just remember that you'll spend some time getting acquainted with UNIX systems; you can't avoid that, and if you feel your exams might be in danger, suppress your quest for a better OS and continue once you get a break from it all.

[Jinto]

The problem with prebuilds is, they work in most cases. Once a user that is used to use prebuilds the wysiwyg way gets a software part that is incompatible with some system component, things can become pretty ugly.
If you have to manually screw the config files and stuff (which often have version/distro dependend semantics/syntax) and have to read on every bit and piece facing a new subproblem with almost every subproblem you try to solve, you can get really frustated as a user. I do understand why certain people do not like Linux. On the other side, if you want/need a highly customizable system, there is no better way to go than Linux. On another note, when I worked for Siemens, employers just took it for granted that I as an IT student have a decent knowledge of Linux (and know how to code things in/for it). Well once you have a deeper knowledge, you'll see for many parts its basically just a bad organized hackjob. It shares the same problems software systems based on COTS (Components Of The Shelf) have. If there is only one bad component, it affects many others and worsens the overall behaviour of the system. And since Linux (and often time Linux users) do not know when a component is bad for their system configuration (which is often system depend... what is a bad component in system A need not be bad in system B), sometimes things can become pretty ugly.

So many bad reputation, now something that is pro Linux. I made a skin for my prefered mp3 player in Linux. Sadly it had a marquee (textbox with scrolling/running text) that was running through the face of the anime character in the skin. While in Windows you'ld often times have no access to the source code of a program (think about e.g. Winamp or Mediaplayer), in Linux you basically have it for nearly all programs. Since I had access to the source code in this case, I was able to set a different size for the mentioned textbox and just recompile it. Sometimes it is nice, to be able to tweak even such things...

[felix]

@ Toua

> "SuSE's Smart just blows any kind of Windows installation method away, where you only need to input a search name, select it and install it. The whole process simplifies acquiring dependencies as it downloads them automatically. I haven't really used Synaptic in Ubuntu that much, but I believe it's a pretty straightforward program after you enable some functions that aren't defaulted."

Am I the only one that doesn't get this. How exactly does it blow the always working perfectly windows installations. In windows there is no such question or trouble as the installation head-aches in linux.

Also, think of it this way, if they know the term they need to use to search then don't you think you are familiar enough with the searchee that you probably even know the direct address of the best programs you need.

But if you don't you're likely to input something that gives you notepad like program or something, when searching for an office suite. (you'd be surprised how many people that use Ms Office for a livin know it's a office suite )
Yes I know Suse comes with that customized version of OO.o...

Anyway, search is over-rated, it always has been, and most developers seem to live in this disillusioned world where people can describe what they need or don't know with a word or few when in the real world (as in real real world) we might need to use a hole bunch of sentences and gestures and still offer total bias as a query to the askedee.

To me features like extensive search implementation is a total waste of system resources. If I want to find something I rather see a very well formed and organized database rather then a search feature, that most likely will display "partial" information. (realistically: cluttered partial information displayed in a totally unordered way; even tho' logically it's impossible not to have a order in things)

@ Vexx

A month ago trying to use Ubuntu and it's utilities and well not much luck. It finally worked after the second install, and just went to the grave after, several days later, I installed some minor linux program. Mmm.. maybe I'm using too new hardware to be running linux.

At least command line thingies always work flawlessly.
But it's a shame you know, linux technically out performs windows in many respects, too bad an ocean of barely-code programs undermines this. But I guess it's an inevitability, windows has always been marked as a crashing-os mostly due to badly coded apps.. Still is. But now we have an ocean of good coded apps to counter this.

Maybe in the future when someone will develop some decent organized fluid interface (devoid of it's current finger-nail bending ugliness) and a big base of java apps for every need will be around I'll consider linux distros a good alternative to windows. -- I like to think it's somewhat harder to make crappy Java apps and I don't have any kind of expectation of linux apps getting better any time soon. At least the base of stable proven fully compatible and well thought out apps will take much more time to form for linux IMO.

[Jinto]

Actually Java in itself is bad. E.g. I don't know why the engine has to ask for time each and every statement that is executed. Its slow and resource hungry, and interpreted, has much much more unreliabale libraries...

E.g. the Component Framework of AT&T (C++) provides Applications/Functions that contain approximately 5% pure failure non atomic methods. The Collection Framework (Java) has approximately 60% pure failure non atomic methods.

60% thats just absolutely dirty coded. The possbility that a possibly recoverable failure causes corrupted state changes is more than 50/50. With such a framework you cannot code reliable software.

[felix]

Heh. Fancy numbers.
I'm seeing it from the opposite view point. C++ programers naturally code in ambiguous smart-ass code.
So I say your 5% happens 80% of the time

But it's a matter of preference, I guess.
I personally could care less of this resource hogging issue that's always on everyones mind. I paid for that ram they sure as damn better use it.

[cyth]

Originally Posted by Cats

To me features like extensive search implementation is a total waste of system resources. If I want to find something I rather see a very well formed and organized database rather then a search feature, that most likely will display "partial" information. (realistically: cluttered partial information displayed in a totally unordered way; even tho' logically it's impossible not to have a order in things)[/SIZE]

Actually, if you actually looked at package managers, you'd notice the search box right after a list of programs and libraries etc., sorted by categories. So, if I want to search for a media player, I browse the list, and under Media Players I i.e. find VLC. Installation done.

[Ledgem]

Question that's only partially related to Linux: when I install Linux, it'll install GRUB as the bootloader, right? But if I later re-install Windows, the Windows boot manager will take over, right?

I've been wanting to redo my Windows install, and if the above is correct, then it'd be better to do it before I install Linux on another drive. Here's the thing: I figured I'd be smart when I reinstalled Windows a year ago and put the operating system on its own 6 GB partition, installing programs to the rest of the drive. It could just be something that I did, but the system doesn't seem to like this setup too much (Windows doesn't always load completely and just hangs). This time around, I'd like to remove that partition and just install Windows normal-style. Can I just re-integrate the partition into the greater partition to form a single partition, without any data loss? Or do I need to back up the drive before attempting that procedure? (And of course, if it is possible, is there any risk of data loss?)

Thanks a lot, everyone. I've made my OpenSUSE installer DVD and my hard drive arrived today. Assuming the Windows reinstall doesn't take the entire day (it's not so far-fetched to say that it just might), I'll be toying with Linux tomorrow or Sunday.

[Jinto]

Originally Posted by Cats

Heh. Fancy numbers.
I'm seeing it from the opposite view point. C++ programers naturally code in ambiguous smart-ass code.
So I say your 5% happens 80% of the time

But it's a matter of preference, I guess.
I personally could care less of this resource hogging issue that's always on everyones mind. I paid for that ram they sure as damn better use it.

And I see, you don't understand, yet have a smart ass answer.

(I guess your argument is based on all hat and no cattle instead of research data)

What I was basically saying, you don't even have a chance to program robust software in Java, because the available frameworks can with a high chance cause corrupted states, whenever an exception occurs (exception handling is crucial in robust programming).

btw. resources is not just RAM, resources means CPU and everything else too.

If you still not believe it, use e.g. Eclipse (an integrated development environment) to code a large software project (Eclipse is coded in Java). (or any other Java software and try to do something big with it)

[Jinto]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

Question that's only partially related to Linux: when I install Linux, it'll install GRUB as the bootloader, right? But if I later re-install Windows, the Windows boot manager will take over, right?

...

That is right (or LILO, depends on your distro), but you can boot load GRUB from the Windows bootloader, at least that is how I do it. (And you can chain the Windows bootloader in GRUB... there is plenty possible. Though if you often use Windows, I'ld say use the Windows bootloader to chain GRUB)

how that is done you can read here:

http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Dual_Bo...NTLDR)_and_why

(yeah I know its a Gentoo Howto , but it really should work on any other system too. Btw. one thing is important, they advice to let Windows boot on the primary disk - because you could have issues with Windows otherwise)

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

Question that's only partially related to Linux: when I install Linux, it'll install GRUB as the bootloader, right? But if I later re-install Windows, the Windows boot manager will take over, right?

You're always better off installing Linux onto a machine that has Windows installed than vice versa. The bootloader that Windows wants to install isn't very friendly to other operating systems. On the other hand, if you already have Windows installed, most modern Linux distributions will install GRUB (or perhaps LILO) and set up dual booting.

[Syaoran]

You can use the Windows boot loader to boot GRUB/Lilo and get into linux that way.

All you need to do is dump your linux bootsector with

dd if=/dev/hda1 of=/linux.bin bs=512 count=1

and alter boot.ini

[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windows XP Professional"
C:\linux.bin="Linux"

Not that hard

[Epyon9283]

but why bother using the windows boot loader when you have something that doesn't actually suck?

[Jinto]

Actually you cannot completly replace the Windows bootloader, you just chain its non-mbr part. That renders your statement contradictory Epyon9283.
Except you meant to use a completly non-Windows system (which would be a rather off-topic rant then).

[Epyon9283]

yes you are correct but chain loading the windows boot loader from grub is still preferable IMO to doing it the other way around. The windows boot loader is quite ugly and devoid of features.

[Jinto]

I setup both each to chainload each other. In theory I could set the default boot up OS in a way, that both bootloaders would loop forever . Well, that aside, after all, the mbr-part of the Windows bootloader has even more functionality than e.g. GRUB. If you lost the ntldr because of corrupted data or otherwise, you can still load Linux (because the basic parts of the MS bootloader are so simple it fits in the 512byte section). The GRUB bootloader however, when there are important non-mbr parts missing, you cannot load anything, because its main functionality itself is chained from the 512byte size mbr section (means thanks to all its graphicness and stuff, the GRUB bootloader provides less functionality in its mbr-part).
One could argue now, which is a more diserable solution.

[Ending]

Guys... Read what you just wrote and say after me: "Linux is user-friendly operating system." Repeat until it begins to sound true.

[Jinto]

Could you guys please stop trolling, and stay factual? k thx.
On a sidenote, I don't like Windows and Linux comparisons, because this is highly dependend on personal preference. While Windows is userfriendlier for most people, it is unsatisfactory for others. E.g. certain things are easier done in Linux, because you don't have to reverse engineer everything if you want to apply advanced changes to OS or certain software, but it has drawbacks too. For people that like ready to use software/OS and accept certain drawbacks, there is Windows. Both OS have their right to exist... and I am sick of reading why In Someones Opinion one su*** more than the other (at least give factual reasons, I can somehow bear it that way, no I don't need repetitve ones...).