Tips on moving to Linux?

[Thorham]

I don't need multiple-display support because I don't use multiple displays

:eek: Really? Multiple displays are so cool that I use an old CRT SVGA monitor as my second display. Anything better than going back to a single monitor. You should try it sometime

So, you spend all this time organizing and maintaining your Start Menu hierarchy

Arguably that only takes a few clicks after installing a program.

they are more productive using them.

But what do they produce? Who actually makes anything on a tablet or smart phone? Aren't those devices aimed at consumption rather than creation? If so, then I can certainly see how anyone mostly interested in creation doesn't find those devices very interesting.

Personally, I find those devices utterly uninteresting, because I'm simply not impressed by them. Computers with touch screen interfaces. Meh. When are we going to see some really cool stuff? Developments that are on par with the early part of the modern computer revolution which made computers available to anyone?

At the ripe old age of 40

:laughing:

I find myself sometimes fighting to stay modern too, and my gut is always pulling me towards staying with what's comfortable.

If you're fighting to stay modern, then what I wonder is: Why bother? Is there anything wrong with being old fashioned if you're not like a grumpy person about it?

[Kremlar]

But what do they produce? Who actually makes anything on a tablet or smart phone? Aren't those devices aimed at consumption rather than creation? If so, then I can certainly see how anyone mostly interested in creation doesn't find those devices very interesting.

I'm talking productivity, not production.  I am far more efficient working with my smartphone and tablet than ever before.  Emails back and forth while on-site at a client, text messages, being able to quickly and easily take photos of equipment racks, scan a LAN to see devices and MAC addresses, having a mini flashlight with me at all times, a GPS for when I'm travelling or even walking through a city I'm unfamiliar with.  Really, the uses are endless.  It's a tool, like anything else.

For more creative stuff, I'm less in the know but saw this recently and thought it was pretty cool:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU-eAzNp5Hw

Personally, I find those devices utterly uninteresting, because I'm simply not impressed by them. Computers with touch screen interfaces. Meh. When are we going to see some really cool stuff? Developments that are on par with the early part of the modern computer revolution which made computers available to anyone?

 

You won't, not for a long time - happens in every industry.  The computer industry has reached a certain level of maturity and major innovations will be far and few between.

But, being able to carry a flashlight, voice communications device, text communications device, camera, camcorder, network scanner & analyzer, GPS, street level world atlas, restaurant finder, level, etc... all in my pocket?  That's pretty freaking cool and I fail to see how anyone can think otherwise.

If you're fighting to stay modern, then what I wonder is: Why bother? Is there anything wrong with being old fashioned if you're not like a grumpy person about it?

Quite simply, staying with what's comfortable is quite boring and no fun.  

[Thorham]

I'm talking productivity, not production.

Good point. I misinterpreted that.

But, being able to carry a flashlight, voice communications device, text communications device, camera, camcorder, network scanner & analyzer, GPS, street level world atlas, restaurant finder, level, etc... all in my pocket?  That's pretty freaking cool and I fail to see how anyone can think otherwise.

It's very practical and useful, sure, but cool? I don't know about that. A beast peecee with three big monitors, now that's what I would call cool.

[Kremlar]

It's very practical and useful, sure, but cool? I don't know about that. A beast peecee with three big monitors, now that's what I would call cool.  

 
 You know, I guess perspective is a big part of it.  I'm a mobile person - I'm often at a client, travelling, out with family, etc. - rarely sitting at my desk unless I have something I need to get done there.  
 
 The big advancements in mobile technology make all the difference in the world for me.

[Nlandas]

A question about virtual machines:

Lets say you are running Linux, and have a PCI card (or other hardware) installed for which Linux has no drivers (so useless from within Linux). Then you set up a Virtual Machine running Windows XP, and in that virtual machine there are drivers for that PCI card. Can the PCI card be used normally from within that Virtual Machine?

I ask this because I have a semi-pro audio card and graphics tablet for which there might not be Linux drivers.  I probably will go dual-boot instaed of VM, but just wanted to get an answer on this question first.

Thanks.

There is some possibility on virtualized systems to pass through direct access to physical hardware. However, it's not automatically flawless as the idea of virtualization was originally to abstract the OS from the actual hardware. I don't think that they've brought this ability to VMWare Workstation but I've had no need for direct hardware acccess other than USB.

VMWAre VSphere 5 server evironment suppors VMDirectPath IO to hardware. It would require additional research to see if VMWare Workstation 10 supported it and your hardware would need to support modern CPU based virtualization technology as well.

So likely dual boot is the option for what you are looking to do.


-Nyle
-Nyle

[Nlandas]

That was my thought exactly.  My system is only a P4 with 3GB RAM. Apparently you can download Microsoft's Virtual Machine 2007 and use it in Windows XP, but I don't think a VM is a practical option for me with this system.  I'll probably either just make a true partition when I'm ready or install on a USB stick (with the intention of later moving it to a real hard drive partition).

I can't install a dedicated hard drive for Linux because my system already has drives on all the IDE channels/pairs.

Absolutely, using disk imaging you simply clone the installation to a large hard drive and then clone it back onto the physical hard drive. It should pick up the new hardware but you may need to boot off the original install media and run a repair install for it to pick up the new hardware.

I'd use the free Virtual Box or VMWAre Workstation demo.

Though really, I'd play with the OS and wouldn't invest too much time in it before deciding to go dual boot. In other words I don't think I'd spend all the time deploying in detail if you are going to then move off VM.

[Nlandas]

Being a grumpy old man who hates change is no better. The world changes. Don't let yourself get old!

Old Amiga users are becoming what we hated! The grumpy old guys who ran their IBM PCs hated the Amiga and the change it represented. Now grump old guys still using their Amigas are the ones spewing hate for anything different. Go figure!

Uhm, really - don't take one grumpy old guy as speaking for the whole group. I see a lot of positive, constructive advice on this thread. A thread that was simply supposed to be about what someone could do to best experience Linux. It wasn't supposed to be a Linux vs. Windows thread at all. In fact the original poster still plans on running Windows XP. I really only see one "old grumpy guy." I started using AmigaOS in 1988 and still love AmigaOS over all OSs but understand its shortcomings as it currently stands.

However, I use a lot of other OSs and the only thing I speak out against today is vertically integrated monopolies.

Windows XP should really be retired at this point, unless you are running on a machine without an Internet connection and only buy boxed retail software it's really not a good idea to keep running it. If you can't afford Windows 7, then there is every reason to give Linux a try.

I wish I could say the same about AmigaOS but I can't afford the hardware necessary to run it anymore. If they'd port it to x86, I'd buy every version released thereafter.

[commodorejohn]

Question still remains - has John even tried Windows 8 yet, or is the incessant badmouthing still based on "facts" garnered from "credible" blogs and stories passed down from the ancients?   You might not see value in something, but that doesn't make it crap out of the box when there's no facts and actual usage case presented.

As I repeatedly said in prior discussions, I simply didn't have an opportunity to try it. Now I have (I'm having to put up with 8.1 on my work machine at the moment.) Funnily enough, it turns out that all those things that looked like terrible design decisions were actually terrible design decisions. There wasn't some kind of cloud of magical illusion muddling my perceptions of the thing from learning about it secondhand that could only be pierced to see the True Miracle of Windows 8 through firsthand experience, believe it or not! So for the record, everybody: Windows 8/8.1 looks like crap because it is, actually, crap.

Having finally tried it and put an end to the "well, you only hate it because you haven't tried it!" snipes, I now yield the floor to the inevitable chorus of "well, you only hate it because you already decided to hate it!"

When configured in Apps view, I don't consider clicking the "Start" button "using the Metro interface".  It's simply a full screen view of all the programs installed on your PC, searchable and easy to find.  There are no touch friendly UI elements involved.

It's still a massively space-wasting thing that destroys the advantages of hierarchical organization the Start menu offered. And since it's not even tablet-friendly in that mode, it ditches the advantages of the Start menu for absolutely no good reason whatsoever.

When I say "minor" exceptions I mean things like using the Control Panel to add a user, which requires using the "Metro" interface.

So you only see minor exceptions because you're discounting the major exceptions altogether? Sure, that makes sense.

You may think you're making your point, but you're not - you're making mine.  That you are grumpy and too comfortable with how things are and are unwilling or unable to accept change - even if things are better or there are better ways.  Please don't take me the wrong way - not trying to be insulting.  If that's how you feel then that's fine, but it's not correct to say that things are not improved or better when they clearly are.

I'm still not clear on why I should feel any obligation to "accept change" to begin with, other than that there seems to be a huge contingent of Internet nerds who believe that the Evil Dissidents who Hate Change are Impeding Progress and must be stamped out. But in any case, I'm not blanketly unwilling to adjust to new things; I simply am not willing to put up with stupid bullshít for the sake of improvements to things that were already good enough for my purposes. And you can stamp your foot and say "well, you're just wrong to think that it's stupid!" all you like, and it won't prove a damn thing. Calling my opinions "not correct" doesn't actually make it so, nor does calling me "grumpy" and "unwilling to accept change" change the fact that I arrived at my opinions honestly, first via observation and deduction, and now through direct experience.

But, you know, you just keep insisting that I'm some kind of noophobic Internet Amish. Maybe if you believe hard enough, it'll come true!

(Spoiler: it won't.)

So, you spend all this time organizing and maintaining your Start Menu hierarchy but are unwilling to get use to a few new UI elements that will make your life much easier?

No, I don't spend "all this time." I spend about fifteen seconds when I install a new program, which happens once a week at most. And by doing that, I don't have to wade through a scrolling wasteland of every program on my PC or type in anything to find exactly what I want.

:eek: Really? Multiple displays are so cool that I use an old CRT SVGA monitor as my second display. Anything better than going back to a single monitor. You should try it sometime

I'm not saying multiple displays don't have their uses for some, they just don't fit my workflow.

If you're fighting to stay modern, then what I wonder is: Why bother? Is there anything wrong with being old fashioned if you're not like a grumpy person about it?

He's "fighting to stay modern" because Modernity is a Moral Obligation in the Church of Techno-Futurism. Simple as that.

[Thorham]

You know, I guess perspective is a big part of it.

Indeed. It's all about what you can make good use of.

If you can't afford Windows 7, then there is every reason to give Linux a try.

I can't afford a Windows upgrade right now (couldn't when I bought my current peecee, either) and I'm simply going to wait until I can afford an upgrade.

Internet Amish

:laughing:

I'm not saying multiple displays don't have their uses for some, they just don't fit my workflow.

No no no. You don't know you need multiple monitors until you've used them

[commodorejohn]

I have used them - and I don't need them. If you like 'em, that's great; I just have no use for them.

[Thorham]

I have used them - and I don't need them. If you like 'em, that's great; I just have no use for them.

Relax, I'm just kidding.

[Fats]

:eek: Really? Multiple displays are so cool that I use an old CRT SVGA monitor as my second display. Anything better than going back to a single monitor. You should try it sometime

+1
It's one of those things you wonder how you ever could live without them once you're used to them.

[Ral-Clan]

Hi guys,

Well, I tried to do a permanent dual boox (XP/Lubuntu) installation of Lubuntu this evening, and I'm sorry to say it did not go smoothly.  In fact, I was stumped pretty early into the install process and not able to proceed.  I'll explain what happened.

First of all, you need to know that my computer has TWO hard drives installed.  A 160GB drive which is my "system" drive.  This contains Windows XP.  The second drive is a 500GB "media" drive which contains all my projects and large files used when I'm doing video editing and music/audio recording.  So the 500GB drive is only for dumping large media files to.

I want to install Lubuntu on the 160GB "system" drive, alongside Windows XP.  I would be happy to evenly split the drive between the two operating systems.

When I begin to install Lubuntu, I get this screen (click to enlarge any images in this message):


(this is just a stock screenshot I found on the 'net, but it's pretty much the same as what I'm shown)

So I choose the first option "Install Lubuntu alongside Windows XP..."

But on the next screen it appears that Lubuntu is trying to install itself on my 500GB "media" drive (which I do NOT want).



The drop down bar at the top does not allow me to select any other drive than the one that is showing.

So....I go back one step (to the first screen) and instead choose "Something else".

Now I get this screen, which seems to show all my drives.  But it's very confusing and non intuitive.  I don't know what to do, and furthermore, I am terrified to try anything for fear of wiping my Windows XP drive completely.



So, now I am stuck.  Not knowing how to proceed in the installation of Lubuntu.

I consider myself pretty computer savvy (having used computers since 1980) but I find this a little daunting (which is disappointing because I heard Linux was welcoming).

I'm thinking what I want to do can be accomplished through the software installer, but if not, I could shut off the secondary "media" hard drive in the BIOS or just unplug in from the IDE cable and then try the install on the 160GB drive alone.

Can anyone provide any advice?  Thanks.

[CritAnime]

Ok. The most simple thing would be to remove the media drive from the equation to limit a potentially nasty incident. This also forces the installer to go for the windows drive.

Asking the installer to do a automatic install is the best way to go if you are not comfortable slicing the drive yourself. And the screenshot 2 is fairly simple to use. You tell it how much of a split you want. There is a little drag bar in the middle that allows you to set the split. Screen shot 3 is the advanced partitioning tool and I don't recommend using it unless you know how it works.

[Ral-Clan]

Ok. The most simple thing would be to remove the media drive from the equation to limit a potentially nasty incident. This also forces the installer to go for the windows drive.

Well, I disabled the Primary IDE Slave drive in the computer's BIOS, but I guess the Lubuntu installer auto-detected it when booting because exactly the same thing as I explained above is happening again (the simple install option only allows me to choose the 500GB drive as its destination and does not show the 160GB system hard drive I want to install to).

So it looks like I'm going to have to open the computer and physically disconnect the 500GB media drive.  

Cracking open the case and fiddling with IDE cables just to install an OS is not my definition of "just works" or "user friendly".  I'm discouraged to say that this is not a wholly positive first impression of Linux/Lubuntu.

I hope it gets better.

[cgutjahr]

So I choose the first option "Install Lubuntu alongside Windows XP..."

They probably went too far when simplifying the install process? Think about it: you asked the installer to install "alongside" Windows XP", not to replace it - I guess that's why the installer won't let you select the first HD... Bad choice, obviously.

I wouldn't recommend using the partitioning tool if this is your first time installing Linux. It's actually easy to use (you should be familiar with the concept from using the Amiga's HDToolbox) and it will warn you when data gets destroyed - but better be safe than sorry.

I recommend disconnecting the media HD before starting the installation process.