Amiga.org

The "Not Quite Amiga but still computer related category" => Alternative Operating Systems => Topic started by: jj on February 13, 2010, 04:33:07 PM

Title: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 13, 2010, 04:33:07 PM
I have a dell inspiron 1501 lapto with a sempron 64bit processor and 4 gb of ram.

I am fed up on vista 64bit running sooooo slow and using 100% cpu time doing simple things.

Which distro of linux whould people suggest.

it should be

64bit
easy to use
be able to be installed with vista still there

what are your thoughts.

Jamie
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: tone007 on February 13, 2010, 04:38:07 PM
Ubuntu fits your criteria.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: tokyoracer on February 13, 2010, 04:38:20 PM
Quote from: JJ;542987
Which distro of linux whould people suggest.

it should be

64bit
easy to use
be able to be installed with vista still there
If your not a hardcore Linux user and just want a clean easy going OS then a Ubuntu based OS should do fine and fits your needs you posted. :)
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Boudicca on February 13, 2010, 04:42:43 PM
Quote from: tokyoracer;542989
If your not a hardcore Linux user and just want a clean easy going OS then a Ubuntu based OS should do fine and fits your needs you posted. :)


its a done deal....Ubuntu!

Easiest, Fast and not too bloated.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 13, 2010, 04:44:26 PM
Just checking it out now, but the download link on their site says 32bit
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 13, 2010, 04:45:04 PM
but on their site download link says 32bit ?
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 13, 2010, 04:45:49 PM
ignore me, should look properly before posting :)
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: countzero on February 13, 2010, 05:13:11 PM
there're lots of buntu flavors there, I'ld personally recommend Xubuntu for a little bit less eye candy for better performance.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Boudicca on February 13, 2010, 05:44:22 PM
Quote from: hardware geek;542995
you should try the msconfig in visa first it is my understanding that visa boots normally into 1 core so tell it to use all cores and memory at start up. Doing this you should see a big speed increase.


huh?....
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Tumbleweed on February 13, 2010, 05:47:56 PM
I've been trialling Suse 11.2 on my main PC. What advantages does Ubuntu have over it?

Weed
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: sim085 on February 13, 2010, 05:56:15 PM
I would go for Ubuntu. I am definitely not what to call an expert, and still managed to install with ease (although had some problems with wireless network).
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: ElPolloDiabl on February 13, 2010, 06:03:08 PM
Make sure you select dual boot install. I'm running Ubuntu and it takes a while to get use to configuring it.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: swift240 on February 13, 2010, 06:06:27 PM
I use both Ubuntu 9.10 32bit and on a 2nd drive Linux Mint 8.0 Helena 64bit.

I find both are good and use far less memory and are both a site faster than Vista.

Mike.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: runequester on February 13, 2010, 06:10:13 PM
Ubuntu is a good safe bet to start with
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Boudicca on February 13, 2010, 06:26:24 PM
Quote from: runequester;543002
Ubuntu is a good safe bet to start with

Thats an understatement ;) so much so, apart from debian (which ubuntu is a spur of) is anyway a less safe bet if there is such a thing), I haven't been persuaded that there is anything better.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: persia on February 13, 2010, 06:49:42 PM
PC Linux gets good reviews, I personally like Gentoo, but I'm a bit of a hacker, and Gentoo is a hackers Linux.

Dream Linux tries to look like OS X out of the box.  

There ain't nothing better than Puppy on older/low spec equipment....
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: desiv on February 13, 2010, 06:55:43 PM
I'd also recommend Ubuntu (or possibly Mint, which is an Ubuntu variant).

I would question why you want 64-bit tho.
If you need it, great.    If you have an app(s) that will take advantage of it, fine.

But if not, 32-bit can save you some headaches involving libs and compatibility.

desiv
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Framiga on February 13, 2010, 07:15:49 PM
@JJ

Ubuntu is your best bet!

http://www.ubuntu1501.com/

PS- that site is a bit outdated .... download the 9.10 ISO from the official Ubuntu sites

Ps2 - erm .... forget that site .... is more confusing than helpfull :-)
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: DiskDoctor on February 13, 2010, 09:07:45 PM
@JJ

What do you need a 64 bit system for?  Personally I see no much advantage in a 64 bit Linux 'xcept for some apps not working.  Besides 64bit system is against Amiga philosophy :-)

Anyway go Ubuntu or Kubuntu that both have nowadays commercial (best) background or/and support.  If you prefer stability, go for Ubuntu.  If you rather like tip-top and up-to-date UI (which KDE is, but less stable), go Kubuntu.  I got Kubuntu 9.10 installed on my HP 530.  It has no problems at all in seeing the existing Windows Vista/7 installation (both GRUB1 and GRUB2).

But remember that best Unix you can ever get (possessing all or most Linux features) is MacOS Leopard (or Snow Leopard).

BTW if you want to check which linuxes are "supported at all", go here (http://www.skype.com/intl/en/download/skype/linux/choose/).

DD
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Piru on February 13, 2010, 09:18:18 PM
Quote from: desiv;543010

I would question why you want 64-bit tho.
If you need it, great.    If you have an app(s) that will take advantage of it, fine.

But if not, 32-bit can save you some headaches involving libs and compatibility.

headaches such as?

Even flash is 64-bit these days... there really is no reason to stay 32-bit anymore.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: TheGoose on February 13, 2010, 09:25:27 PM
Ubuntu
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: desiv on February 13, 2010, 09:57:21 PM
Quote from: Piru;543022
headaches such as?

Even flash is 64-bit these days... there really is no reason to stay 32-bit anymore.

Well, personally, we have have issues with certain agents (Acronis, TrendMicro) on some of our 64-bit dual pathed environments.

While we have workarounds for most, I wouldn't recommend that type of thing for someone looking to replace Windows with Linux.

Having to tell them about 32-bit compatiblity (i.e. This page: http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/534 ) is great, but for someone just wanting something to "work", I'm not sure I see the benefit.

The question is, what is he going to run that will really want/need 64-bit?

If there is something, then fine.

Of course, I live more in the server world, so YMMV.

desiv
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: TrevorDick on February 13, 2010, 10:33:55 PM
Like others have already mentioned.  Ubuntu is a good first choice.  I have worked hard over the past couple of years to like linux (;-))and have tested perhaps 8 or 9 different distros.

Ubuntu is probably the easiest to install and is well supported.  However I also like Mint and PCLinuxOS.  I use Fedora on one of my old laptops and have Debian installed on both my dual-booting SAM Flex and A1-XE machines.  I also have an older version of Ubuntu on my Pegasos II.

TrevorD
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: rkauer on February 14, 2010, 12:05:50 AM
Did someone mentioned Ubuntu?
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 12:40:24 PM
Quote from: sim085;542999
I would go for Ubuntu. I am definitely not what to call an expert, and still managed to install with ease (although had some problems with wireless network).

tell me about it, spent hours and hours and lots of terminal work and still cant get the wirelss card in my laptop to work.

Also can not get anything to play dvds for some reason.  LInux still as got a long long way to go to catch up with windows and macos to be honest.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 12:43:42 PM
Quote from: DiskDoctor;543020
@JJ

What do you need a 64 bit system for?  Personally I see no much advantage in a 64 bit Linux 'xcept for some apps not working.  Besides 64bit system is against Amiga philosophy :-)

Anyway go Ubuntu or Kubuntu that both have nowadays commercial (best) background or/and support.  If you prefer stability, go for Ubuntu.  If you rather like tip-top and up-to-date UI (which KDE is, but less stable), go Kubuntu.  I got Kubuntu 9.10 installed on my HP 530.  It has no problems at all in seeing the existing Windows Vista/7 installation (both GRUB1 and GRUB2).

But remember that best Unix you can ever get (possessing all or most Linux features) is MacOS Leopard (or Snow Leopard).

BTW if you want to check which linuxes are "supported at all", go here (http://www.skype.com/intl/en/download/skype/linux/choose/).

DD

Umm 64bit because I would like to use all the ram in my laptop.  I only run 64 bit os as all my chips are.  why run a slower version of vista/7/linux ???
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 12:54:39 PM
Quote from: DiskDoctor;543020
@JJ

What do you need a 64 bit system for?  Personally I see no much advantage in a 64 bit Linux 'xcept for some apps not working.  Besides 64bit system is against Amiga philosophy :-)

Anyway go Ubuntu or Kubuntu that both have nowadays commercial (best) background or/and support.  If you prefer stability, go for Ubuntu.  If you rather like tip-top and up-to-date UI (which KDE is, but less stable), go Kubuntu.  I got Kubuntu 9.10 installed on my HP 530.  It has no problems at all in seeing the existing Windows Vista/7 installation (both GRUB1 and GRUB2).

But remember that best Unix you can ever get (possessing all or most Linux features) is MacOS Leopard (or Snow Leopard).

BTW if you want to check which linuxes are "supported at all", go here (http://www.skype.com/intl/en/download/skype/linux/choose/).

DD

Umm 64bit because I would like to use all the ram in my laptop.  I only run 64 bit os as all my chips are.  why run a slower version of vista/7/linux ???
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 12:57:06 PM
pretty much nothing seems to work easily or at all.  would i be better starting again with the 32bit version. is this the best distro for my needs.  Does anyone know of a distro that supports my dell wireless card out of the box without trying for hours and failing to get ndiswrapper to work with the windows drivers
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: tone007 on February 14, 2010, 01:00:25 PM
Quote from: JJ;543112
Umm 64bit because I would like to use all the ram in my laptop.  I only run 64 bit os as all my chips are.  why run a slower version of vista/7/linux ???


Physical Address Extension (PAE, built into Windows) will let you use 4GB of RAM on 32-bit Windows.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 01:03:29 PM
what about linux ?
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 01:25:10 PM
nothing will play dvds, one app claims i dont have permissions to the drive , even though I can open the dvd and look at all the files on it, any ideas ?
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: tone007 on February 14, 2010, 02:17:18 PM
I imagine Linux supports PAE as well, never tried it myself though (no machines with more than 2GB RAM currently.)

As for the DVD issue, never experienced that.  Tried VLC yet?
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: DiskDoctor on February 14, 2010, 02:44:41 PM
Quote from: JJ;543112
Umm 64bit because I would like to use all the ram in my laptop.  I only run 64 bit os as all my chips are.  why run a slower version of vista/7/linux ???


I don't get it.  I suppose you can use a 32-bit system to address up to 4 GB of RAM (which is your situation I suppose).

Besides you're not really forced to 64-bit linux anyway.  In my work, I got a machine that has 16 GB of RAM.  And I have Kubuntu 9.10 installed, 32-bit version as well.  There's a hack (not sure, in GRUB2 maybe) that allows 32-bit linux to be installed on a machine having more that 4 GB RAM.  And of course, my Linux sees all 16 GB of RAM :lol:

So to me, installing 64-bit linux nowadays is as someone said, more headaches (to already a lot caused by Linux programs / libraries (well, unless someone is using Linux to be fixing all the stuff all over)).

Think over pal.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 03:06:43 PM
just cant get machine to work properly, so going to try a 32bit install instead.  The wireless thing is pain in the arse though
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: DiskDoctor on February 14, 2010, 03:21:48 PM
Quote from: JJ;543130
just cant get machine to work properly, so going to try a 32bit install instead.  The wireless thing is pain in the arse though

DELL you say.

I'm through it, too.

Try this (http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers/b43).  But check first if that's the device you're having.

EDIT* That (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/WifiDocs/Driver/Ndiswrapper) might help also.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 03:37:35 PM
cheers will give them a try.  I did try a whole lot of stuff from the ubuntu forums, using the wrapper. but still couldnt get it too work  I have wipped the volumes and will try 32bit version and see if i get more luck
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: DiskDoctor on February 14, 2010, 04:42:03 PM
What device is your wireless client in particular?  I mean vendor/model?
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Piru on February 14, 2010, 05:07:32 PM
Quote from: JJ;543120
nothing will play dvds

Due to idiotic DRM legal crap the stock debian based linux will only play region free DVDs out of the box. To fix it for Ubuntu:
Code: [Select]

sudo apt-get install totem-xine libxine1-ffmpeg libdvdread4
sudo /usr/share/doc/libdvdread4/install-css.sh


While at it, lets also install the official flash plugin:
Code: [Select]

sudo apt-get install flashplugin-installer


...and java:
Code: [Select]

sudo apt-get install sun-java6-plugin


These all work perfectly on both 32-bit and 64-bit Ubuntu.

Free bonus: Google Earth
Code: [Select]

sudo apt-get install googleearth-package
make-googleearth-package
sudo dpkg -i googleearth*.deb

(P.S. You might need to manually sudo apt-get install lib32nss-mdns and then sudo apt-get-f install .. But only if the googleearth deb doesn't install out of the box)
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 05:10:26 PM
thanks piru will give it a try
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 05:27:54 PM
cheers diskdoctor got the wireless working.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 05:42:37 PM
Quote from: Piru;543141
Due to idiotic DRM legal crap the stock debian based linux will only play region free DVDs out of the box. To fix it for Ubuntu:
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install totem-xine libxine1-ffmpeg libdvdread4
sudo /usr/share/doc/libdvdread4/install-css.sh
While at it, lets also install the official flash plugin:
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install flashplugin-installer
...and java:
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install sun-java6-plugin
These all work perfectly on both 32-bit and 64-bit Ubuntu.

Free bonus: Google Earth
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install googleearth-package
make-googleearth-package
sudo dpkg -i googleearth*.deb
(P.S. You might need to manually sudo apt-get install lib32nss-mdns and then sudo apt-get-f install .. But only if the googleearth deb doesn't install out of the box)


Hi Piru

THanks for that.   Flash working, java working.  DVD not working with the movie player, installing vlc now see if that works..

Now this long shot and doesnt matter as can always boot back into windows if not, but i can log int work from home.  It uses a java app for the tunnelling which then uses remote desktop, is there a remote desktop that is exactly the same as the windows version.  I cant see this working myself

i think it runs through a cytrix server if that helps
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Piru on February 14, 2010, 05:45:42 PM
Quote from: JJ;543146
is there a remote desktop that is exactly the same as the windows version.
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install grdesktop
As I understand that java app somehow opens a tunnel which the remote desktop connection goes thru.. I dunno if this particular part will work, however.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 05:48:40 PM
will see if that works.  btw vlc plays dvds a treat now. thanks for that.  Linux all new to me
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: tokyoracer on February 14, 2010, 05:54:50 PM
Mint is a good flavour of Linux. (lol get it? FLAVOUR?!.... *cough* quite...)
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 05:57:07 PM
this prob going to get annoying for everyone, but you all being helpful.   I have got a hp photosmart printer c4580 that s connected to my router through wireless.   Any idea if drivers exist for linux for wireless printers

also got the laptop connected to my home theatre via bluetooth but ubuntu stil using laptop speakers for sound, any ideas or does ths only work with windows pcs.  maybe i should stop being lazy and do some internet searching

worked out the bluetooth, you have to slect the outputin sound prefreces everytime you want to use it
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Dr_Righteous on February 14, 2010, 06:38:47 PM
If you want something lighter, CrunchBang is based on Ubuntu but uses OpenBox as the wm. It's lighter and cleaner than Ubuntu Netbook Remix.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 14, 2010, 06:48:54 PM
not using netnook remix not running on a netbook :)
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Debaser on February 14, 2010, 06:58:52 PM
Quote from: Dr_Righteous;543155
If you want something lighter, CrunchBang is based on Ubuntu but uses OpenBox as the wm. It's lighter and cleaner than Ubuntu Netbook Remix.


+1 Dr. Righteous
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: mike- on February 14, 2010, 08:05:00 PM
Quote from: Debaser;543159
+1 Dr. Righteous


That sounds good, i use openbox and xfce4 here, works like a charm.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 23, 2010, 11:26:41 PM
Quote from: Piru;543141
Due to idiotic DRM legal crap the stock debian based linux will only play region free DVDs out of the box. To fix it for Ubuntu:
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install totem-xine libxine1-ffmpeg libdvdread4
sudo /usr/share/doc/libdvdread4/install-css.sh
While at it, lets also install the official flash plugin:
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install flashplugin-installer
...and java:
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install sun-java6-plugin
These all work perfectly on both 32-bit and 64-bit Ubuntu.

Free bonus: Google Earth
Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get install googleearth-package
make-googleearth-package
sudo dpkg -i googleearth*.deb
(P.S. You might need to manually sudo apt-get install lib32nss-mdns and then sudo apt-get-f install .. But only if the googleearth deb doesn't install out of the box)

After much rangling had to go 8.04 lts because my gpu was no longer supported.

Anyway when trying to get the package to enable me to watch dvds , its says package not found.  Have all the boxes ticked for software sources, any ideas?

thanks
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: desiv on February 23, 2010, 11:30:13 PM
http://www.dailygyan.com/2008/04/how-to-have-dvd-playback-adobe-flash.html
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: stefcep2 on February 23, 2010, 11:58:48 PM
Mandriva used to be the best Linux until KDE 4 came out.  The control centre alone was worth it, and it was fast, made Ubuntu look positively pedestrian.  I now use ubuntu 9.04, and I'm loath to upgarde to 9.10, as i finally have EVERYTHING working.  Ubuntu IS bloated, no matter what they tell you, and is no faster than Win 7.

Ubuntu 64-bit seems more hassle than its worth for the user who just wants to get on the net, email, instant message, playback and encode some medai files, and write the odd document or spread sheet.  Last time i used 64 bit Ubuntu, I found the encoding/decoding speeds were not significantly faster, and i never needed the 4 gig ram anyway, so why bother?
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Karlos on February 24, 2010, 12:11:01 AM
@stefcep

You should consider going for the LTS versions if you don't like upgrading regularly. I am still on 8.04 LTS and hopefully shalln't be upgrading until 10 (the next LTS version) comes out.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: desiv on February 24, 2010, 12:13:40 AM
Quote from: stefcep2;544753
 Ubuntu IS bloated, no matter what they tell you, and is no faster than Win 7.

Ubuntu installs from a single CD (not DVD).  
We have different ideas of bloat. :)

And Windows 7 barely installs and runs on my PC, where Ubuntu is perfectly happy.  However, I admit my PC is old by MS standards..

desiv
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: stefcep2 on February 24, 2010, 01:49:59 AM
Quote from: desiv;544756
Ubuntu installs from a single CD (not DVD).  
We have different ideas of bloat. :)

And Windows 7 barely installs and runs on my PC, where Ubuntu is perfectly happy.  However, I admit my PC is old by MS standards..

desiv

Much of the stuff on a Win 7 dvd is due to drivers for hardware you don't and never will have.  And then in Linux you need to install propriatory nvidia or ati drivers, video codecs, Flash, Acrobat, a decent media player-Kaffeine I found is the best overall, my USB digital TV stick only works with it, a video editor, DVD ripper and then its not so lean any more.
Vista is a pig, but Ubuntu is no speed demon either-in fact I've seen benchmarks that its slower- than Win 7?  And the Ubuntu GUI just feels less snappy


@Karlos.  yep i learned about the LTS version after I'd spent a lot of time and effort putting 9.04 together.  I'll stick with 9.04 for as long as there are security updates.  It does everything I need.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: the_leander on February 24, 2010, 03:01:47 AM
Quote from: Dr_Righteous;543155
If you want something lighter, CrunchBang is based on Ubuntu but uses OpenBox as the wm. It's lighter and cleaner than Ubuntu Netbook Remix.


I ended up using CrunchBang on my 701 as UNR was an absolute dog.

That said, when (if?) Elive 2.0 is released I'll be dumping it.

Linux has its quirks, and in some cases it can be utterly infuriating. But I have found that once you have it working *just so*, it'll remain that way unless you do something really, really stupid. Windows, even Vista tends to degrade over time even without constantly adding/removing applications in my experience.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: DavidF215 on February 24, 2010, 03:44:00 AM
Quote from: JJ;542987
I have a dell inspiron 1501 lapto with a sempron 64bit processor and 4 gb of ram.

I am fed up on vista 64bit running sooooo slow and using 100% cpu time doing simple things.

Which distro of linux whould people suggest.

Junk Vista and jump to Win7. It's much better. My co-worker said Win7 is much better than Vista, and I actually like it for what I do. I bypassed Vista.

I've used SUSE Linux and liked it.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: desiv on February 24, 2010, 03:58:23 AM
Quote from: stefcep2;544768
And then in Linux you need to install propriatory nvidia or ati drivers, video codecs, Flash, Acrobat,

You don't "have" to install the drivers, but it's recommended.
And the video drivers and codecs aren't that large.

Adobe is bloat on both OSes.

Quote from: stefcep2;544768
a decent media player-Kaffeine I found is the best overall, my USB digital TV stick only works with it,
You don't generally have to, although Kaffiene is nice.  Again, I wouldn't call it bloatware compared to Windows Media Player.

Quote from: stefcep2;544768
a video editor,
Basic editors aren't that large either.  Serious ones are, but then they are for MS as well.
Quote from: stefcep2;544768
DVD ripper and then its not so lean any more.
DVD rippers aren't that large either.

I still, in that list, don't see much bloat...  IMHO..

Not that there isn't some bloat in there.  The Windows managers are definitely bloaty (my new word for the day) and OpenOffice, although a good price, is bloat at it's finest.

Quote from: stefcep2;544768
Vista is a pig, but Ubuntu is no speed demon either-in fact I've seen benchmarks that its slower- than Win 7?  And the Ubuntu GUI just feels less snappy

My feeling, on really fast machines with lots of memory, Vista will outdo Ubuntu in some (most?) situations.

But most of the Ubuntu I've seen is being installed on slightly older machines, and that's where Ubuntu starts to really take off.

Also, as pointed out below (er.. the below which is above of course :-), MS will get slower and slower, and Ubuntu will just keep right on performing great.

I use both, but I prefer Ubuntu, and it's kept me from not having to buy a new PC to enjoy a modern OS.

desiv
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: the_leander on February 24, 2010, 04:45:15 AM
Quote from: the_leander;544775

That said, when (if?) Elive 2.0 is released I'll be dumping it.



You know, it has often been said that my timing sucks. In this case if I'd waited just a couple of more hours I would have been able to say this:

New Stable Version 2.0 out in a week or so. (http://www.elivecd.org/Main/Blog/article-new-stable-version-near)

I am seriously looking forward to putting this on both the F5 and the EeePC.

Even if I do have to stump up a couple of quid for the privilege.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 24, 2010, 07:46:25 AM
I have win 7 on my main pc.   And I am seriously conidering installing it on my laptop.  WIll see how it goes
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 25, 2010, 09:30:44 AM
Quote from: desiv;544746
http://www.dailygyan.com/2008/04/how-to-have-dvd-playback-adobe-flash.html


Thanks that worked though I did have to split the fist command down into its actual sperate commands.
 
Couldn't find skype on that link , couldnt find package.
 
Also incase anyone else has problems with this distro and ati card and opengl flickering like crazy, just switch off all desktop effects.  Seems ATI drivers and opengl do not play well with desktop effects.
 
And I rather have emulators and video using hardware rather than softwware for rendering. :)
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Venkman on February 25, 2010, 10:57:09 AM
I've just installed Ubuntu to my old laptop. It kept coming up with a BSOD under XP, and I tried to reformat with the restore disk, only to find that the disk didn't work anymore, and since the machine is almost 10 years old I can't get a replacement restore disk. So rather than give up on it, I thought I'd try Ubuntu. I was rather surprised at how easilty it installed and how well it runs. I did have a problem getting my Netgear pcmcia wireless network card to work, but I had a spare USB one and it worked as soon as I plugged it in.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 25, 2010, 11:13:03 AM
ubuntu and linux has come a long way, 9.10 was no good for my laptop , but 8.04 is just as good
 
my no name bluetooth usb dongle worked straight away and can connect to my home theatre using bluetooth and play music.
 
Xbox 360 wirless reciever works and so does xbox 360 controller with no extra work.
 
easy to add things and remove panels.  Its not as easy to use as windows but im finding it more configurable and more rewarding.
 
Ubuntu is the way fwd
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Karlos on February 25, 2010, 11:17:37 AM
Another vote for ubuntu here, using the 64-bit 8.04 LTS release since it came out. I've never had any problems with it until last week, when a flash/firefox update appears to have made my X server unstable. To be fair, it probably isn't firefox's (or even flash) fault as I'm using the proprietry nvidia drivers (190.53) and I suspect there may be hidden bugs therein.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 25, 2010, 11:25:01 AM
I had to go from 9.10 beacuse the ati drivers for my card no longer worked, and the newest drivers dont support my card anymore.  Tried all sorts of things and ended up with a machine that would only run in low graphics mode.
 
If I could have got my ati card working i would have kept 9.10 it was just that little bit slicker than 8.04.  Faster loading as well.
 
But I must say i am still happy.  Last time I tried a linux distro was many many years ago and I was presently supprised at what a usuable os it is.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Venkman on February 25, 2010, 11:33:19 AM
I do have an issue with the nvidia 420 go in my laptop if I use the restricted driver that's available for download. All I get when I restart the machine is a flashing screen and no icons. I can see my desktop bakground okay, but that's it. However, since this laptop is only really used for chatting online and surfing the net, I don't really have need for the nvidia driver, and it works great without them.

I'm liking Ubuntu so much I'm actually considering installing it to my main PC on a dual-boot.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 25, 2010, 11:56:10 AM
Anyone know of a good media player that has the sort of feature os windows media player.  Just want to create an easy to view music library with album covers that will sync ass well as windows with my creative zen vision m
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: persia on February 25, 2010, 01:01:22 PM
Sabayon seems pretty cool too....  But really you can't go wrong with most of the big distros it's just a matter of personal taste.

Puppy remains my favourite on low end equipment....
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: thanos on February 25, 2010, 01:16:41 PM
I would also suggest Ubuntu.  The newer versions seem to be fairly polished, easy to use and install.

I have recently installed a copy on the the laptop for the wife's IBM Thinkhpad R40.  Great for surfing the web, I also bought a little cheap USB joypad so that she could play some old NES games under emulation.

The wife seems happy, so that makes me happy.

I have also tried a new version of Mint OS on my HP510 laptop, I liked it even more.

I think most Linux distros have come a long way and should serve most peoples needs.

Go ahead and play with a few, several seem to have live disks to test, so no installation is required to test them.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: cecilia on February 25, 2010, 02:33:59 PM
I've been using Ubuntu 8.10 for a while now and it works very nicely indeed

I haven't installed any nvidia drivers because I'm afraid to mess things up and it works fine anyway.

this is a multi-boot system and has really extended to useability and life of my 2002 Dell laptop.

I love how I can plug in my friend's new digital camera and it is immediately seen. no fuss, no muss. Same with BlackBerry phones.

I wish the video editing was more mature, but that will come in time. I love linux.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: jj on February 25, 2010, 02:41:22 PM
same with printers I found also.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: SaMiga on March 07, 2010, 06:23:30 PM
Agree, but in my SaMiga i have installed Xubuntu, its quick, and it runs om my Amiga Box Emulator (A600HD with a Epia Pico ITX inside, and a Keyrah for the keyboard) with one 2.5 inch SATA 120 gb hd for Xubuntu, and one 2.5 inch 30 gb HD for Cloantos KX-Light.

check this link
http://www.amiga.org/gallery/index.php?u=5970

It runs like a charm.

Regards SaMiga
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: motrucker on March 07, 2010, 07:03:11 PM
I do not like Linux all that much. It has a few strong points, but there is just too much it can't do - easily!!!

Having said that, I do keep a copy of DSL  (Damn Small Linux) on a USB thumb drive in case something fouls up on one of my machines, or....
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: stefcep2 on March 07, 2010, 09:36:45 PM
Quote from: JJ;545068
Anyone know of a good media player that has the sort of feature os windows media player.  Just want to create an easy to view music library with album covers that will sync ass well as windows with my creative zen vision m

kaffeine, rythmbox
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: odin on March 08, 2010, 12:28:48 AM
Another vote for Rythmbox from me. Get XBMC if you want to turn it into a fully fledged fancy 'Home Theatre PC'.
Title: Re: Which Linux?
Post by: Nlandas on March 08, 2010, 04:24:08 AM
I vote SuSe. YaST is simply great for configuration and software install.