Just wondering...has anybody used the Lindows OS? I own Windows XP Pro and am fed up with it and MS in general, so I had planned on installing Red Hat Linux when my bigger hard disk arrives. However, I'm not so sure that I want to part with all my Windows applications, so the Lindows OS seems interesting, since it supposedly can run some Windows apps and saves files in their native format (.doc, etc.).
Any recommendations on Linux or Lindows? Or should I just try Linux out and forget about running MS applications on it? (Windows XP overwites the boot file of any other OS I've tried to install on the secondary parition (Win 98 SE, 2000, etc), so I'd have to have two seperate disks to run both.)
Full Version: "lindows" Os
Lindows would be a definite step down from Windows XP.
From what I've read, Lindows is a very limited OS with very limited windows functionality, a yearly subscription, and a (fairly small) library of downloadable applications (compared to what's available for free with linux/windows). If you dual booted (using LILO or GRUB) XP and Linux, you'd be much happier.
Red Hat Linux has pretty much been the industry standard for a long time, if you simply switched over and only ran Red Hat (or Debian), I don't think you'd miss much at all.
As far as needing a new hard drive to install another OS, you need to use a boot manager such as LILO or GRUB to choose your OS, XP won't give you any trouble if you are using LILO or GRUB. I can guarantee you that you do not need two hard drives.
From what I've read, Lindows is a very limited OS with very limited windows functionality, a yearly subscription, and a (fairly small) library of downloadable applications (compared to what's available for free with linux/windows). If you dual booted (using LILO or GRUB) XP and Linux, you'd be much happier.
Red Hat Linux has pretty much been the industry standard for a long time, if you simply switched over and only ran Red Hat (or Debian), I don't think you'd miss much at all.
As far as needing a new hard drive to install another OS, you need to use a boot manager such as LILO or GRUB to choose your OS, XP won't give you any trouble if you are using LILO or GRUB. I can guarantee you that you do not need two hard drives.
Another possibility is to use Linux as your main OS, and run Windows from linux using vmware for Linux like this..
Check out:
http://www.vmware.com
http://www.vmware.com/products/desktop/ws_...s_features.html
Check out:
http://www.vmware.com
http://www.vmware.com/products/desktop/ws_...s_features.html
Okay, I'll just clear up a few things and give my Point of View...
1. Linux is just the Kernel, the base system of (nearly) every Distribution consists of the Kernel and utilities/libraries from the GNU-Project, therefore the system is often called GNU/Linux.
2. Lindows is a very strapped down Version of the Debian Distribution, with an enhanched version of wine, a Win32 emulator; the original Version of Wine, which works fine with every GNU/Linux System (RedHat and Debian e.g. have very good Wine packages). There are other, specialized, commercial versions of wine out, like the ones from Codeweavers (Crossover Office for running MS Office) and Transgaming (WineX for running DirectX Games).
3. There are a lot of good Distributions out (each one with its owns strenght and weak sides), a good resource for an overlook is Distrowatch. My recommendations are:
RedHat
Slackware
Debian
Gentoo
For a newbie I would really recommend RedHat (Wait for Version 8!!!), which has an easy install, great configuration-utilities and a rock-solid base. I would suggest that you stay away from those new "Desktop-Only" Linux-Distributions, like Lycoris or Lindows, since they focus too much on imitating Windows, which takes away a lot of the power of GNU/Linux. RedHat really delivers a easy but very powerful distribtion for everyone, so use it!
dev0
1. Linux is just the Kernel, the base system of (nearly) every Distribution consists of the Kernel and utilities/libraries from the GNU-Project, therefore the system is often called GNU/Linux.
2. Lindows is a very strapped down Version of the Debian Distribution, with an enhanched version of wine, a Win32 emulator; the original Version of Wine, which works fine with every GNU/Linux System (RedHat and Debian e.g. have very good Wine packages). There are other, specialized, commercial versions of wine out, like the ones from Codeweavers (Crossover Office for running MS Office) and Transgaming (WineX for running DirectX Games).
3. There are a lot of good Distributions out (each one with its owns strenght and weak sides), a good resource for an overlook is Distrowatch. My recommendations are:
RedHat
Slackware
Debian
Gentoo
For a newbie I would really recommend RedHat (Wait for Version 8!!!), which has an easy install, great configuration-utilities and a rock-solid base. I would suggest that you stay away from those new "Desktop-Only" Linux-Distributions, like Lycoris or Lindows, since they focus too much on imitating Windows, which takes away a lot of the power of GNU/Linux. RedHat really delivers a easy but very powerful distribtion for everyone, so use it!
dev0
Don't forget about Mandrake, the most "user friendly" distribution. Mandrake 9.0 should be available in few days!
www.mandrake.com
www.mandrake.com
I use the server setup of Mandrake for most of my network and web services. But I have a 60mhz pentium putting around running debian and exim cause exim will not run under Mandrake for me and sendmail still refuses to work.
yup...
i must admit.. that i know very little about lindows...
i know there is a "sea" of diffrences between these os`s..
but would anyone concider the mac os 10.2..
(yup. version shipped as x86. comp..)
i must admit.. that i know very little about lindows...
i know there is a "sea" of diffrences between these os`s..
but would anyone concider the mac os 10.2..
(yup. version shipped as x86. comp..)
Where is the x86 version of OSX available?
yup...
mac os X 10.2 (forgot the X)
codename "Jaguar"
this is one link:
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebO...0.3.1.1.0?61,74
here is another:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/technologies/darwin.html
i will try to find some more...
mac os X 10.2 (forgot the X)
codename "Jaguar"
this is one link:
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebO...0.3.1.1.0?61,74
here is another:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/technologies/darwin.html
i will try to find some more...
My question was not "what is OSX? "
I was wondering if the OSXonX86 chimera is really existing in an usable way anywhere.
Did anyone saw it working?
I was wondering if the OSXonX86 chimera is really existing in an usable way anywhere.
Did anyone saw it working?
yup...
ah.. sorry.. missread..
yup.. nothing official from apple..
some versions of jaguar/Marklar is out as preview/betas...
read in a other forum.. that he installed marklar beta
on some machines at work.. and that worked (almost) perfectly..
some "unofficial" dl. links exist
the chances.. is pretty big.. that this project will
go the same way that "rapsody" went tough
ah.. sorry.. missread..
yup.. nothing official from apple..
some versions of jaguar/Marklar is out as preview/betas...
read in a other forum.. that he installed marklar beta
on some machines at work.. and that worked (almost) perfectly..
some "unofficial" dl. links exist
the chances.. is pretty big.. that this project will
go the same way that "rapsody" went tough
just a few things some people have missed or i have that' could be painful and so my own comment.
i'm not sure how much u use your computer, for or what u use it for so i can't make assumptions but heres a few things i reakon u should know.
bootloaders - try to avoid if its not gonna be perminate use a floppy, incase you wanna remove the linux bootloader without breaking anything, depending on the bootloader.
mandrake 8.2 (current i think) & 9.0 is easier than redhat 7.3 (current) & 8.0 (third beta null) for a linux newbie and keeps all but some of the power of a general gnu/linux distro for the points below.
hardware - not sure totally on this one but for some popular small devices like the usb acatel speedtouch modem the kernel modules are a part of the default mandrake kernel so u don't have to make your own kernel which your should learn how to do anyway in my opinion.
ntfs support - if u use ntfs partition(s) u will have only read support from them not write (if at all depending on the distro). there is too much to describe on the ntfs 'situation' with the kernel at the mo so i'll just say mandrake supports read only redhat has no support not sure on others.
the control centre in mandrake is really good if u can't be bothered to do things manually or if u are a newbie.
choice between the main two desktop enviroments kde & gnome
(in the preference the gnome & kde developers 'mostly' wanted them to see, redhat have killed kde in my opinion but i use gnome anyway)
general points
as is dev0's comment on the lindows, xandros & lycorus they may suit what u need but to re-affirm they aren't as powerful.
if u haven't used gnu/linux before don't use gentoo or debian as they will club u like a dead seal unless however u wanna learn about linux and gnu and nuttin else until u have learned how most of it all works. but debian and gentoo do rock.
however just for reference i use redhats's third beta null and i recommended mandrake to a friend and he's getting on ok. but whatever happens i'll tell u now u'll have teething problems.
i'm not sure how much u use your computer, for or what u use it for so i can't make assumptions but heres a few things i reakon u should know.
bootloaders - try to avoid if its not gonna be perminate use a floppy, incase you wanna remove the linux bootloader without breaking anything, depending on the bootloader.
mandrake 8.2 (current i think) & 9.0 is easier than redhat 7.3 (current) & 8.0 (third beta null) for a linux newbie and keeps all but some of the power of a general gnu/linux distro for the points below.
hardware - not sure totally on this one but for some popular small devices like the usb acatel speedtouch modem the kernel modules are a part of the default mandrake kernel so u don't have to make your own kernel which your should learn how to do anyway in my opinion.
ntfs support - if u use ntfs partition(s) u will have only read support from them not write (if at all depending on the distro). there is too much to describe on the ntfs 'situation' with the kernel at the mo so i'll just say mandrake supports read only redhat has no support not sure on others.
the control centre in mandrake is really good if u can't be bothered to do things manually or if u are a newbie.
choice between the main two desktop enviroments kde & gnome
(in the preference the gnome & kde developers 'mostly' wanted them to see, redhat have killed kde in my opinion but i use gnome anyway)
general points
as is dev0's comment on the lindows, xandros & lycorus they may suit what u need but to re-affirm they aren't as powerful.
if u haven't used gnu/linux before don't use gentoo or debian as they will club u like a dead seal unless however u wanna learn about linux and gnu and nuttin else until u have learned how most of it all works. but debian and gentoo do rock.
however just for reference i use redhats's third beta null and i recommended mandrake to a friend and he's getting on ok. but whatever happens i'll tell u now u'll have teething problems.
QUOTE(Cygnus X1 @ Sep 19 2002 - 09:43 PM)
Windows XP overwites the boot file of any other OS I've tried to install on the secondary parition (Win 98 SE, 2000, etc), so I'd have to have two seperate disks to run both.
Are you installing these other OS's for dual booting after having XP installed, or is XP overwriting the boot file during or immediately after the install? With MS OS's generally you have to install the older OS's first then install the newer OS's to recognize the need for dual booting.
G
prefacing this entire post is the following information:
------
i have tried linux distributions for over a year [mandrake --> red hat --> debian --> libranet --> debian] and my experiences are based on mandrake being too buggy, red hat being too bland and rpm-ed, debian being too hard to configure right, libranet easy in every way, then back to debian because i learned more and was able to configure it better, etc. i am in no way a linux god.
anyone attempting to choose a linux distribution should visit www.distrowatch.com
------
i think the choice is debian... *dodging bullets*
it is easy to install [if you know how to configure X anyways...] and the easiest linux flavor to maintain [apt].
if debian is too hairy for you then try libranet linux [based off of debian woody, which adds a nicer installer, great hardware detection and custom window managers...]
think of the relationship of libranet to debian as "mandrake to red hat" and you should be fine.
also, libranet 2.7 came out with kde3, gnome2 and xfree86 4.2 way before they were in the debian sid tree. that seems quite humorous to me, anyways...
i don't know why so many distributions use rpm... it is horrible.
if you wanna dual boot use grub [thanx darin...] and put linux and windoze on their own harddrives, put linux as primary and windoze as secondary and use a chainloader to boot into windoze. windoze is too stupid to detect the primary hd, and if you run into any hairy situations you can always disconnect linux to do work on windoze [but honestly...it will be formated and used as extra storage for linux in a few months anyways so don't worry much about that...]
that's about all i can say... but it was a great call when i just went out and bought another hard-drive to install and test alot of other linux distributions...
edit: btw, libranet is 100% compatible with debian, but adds additional [somewhat proprietary...] packages like Xadminmenu for easy configuration of your linux box. just thought i would throw that info out there... oh, and libranet 2.0 is free to download but atm 2.7 is not free.
end of rambling...
mike
------
i have tried linux distributions for over a year [mandrake --> red hat --> debian --> libranet --> debian] and my experiences are based on mandrake being too buggy, red hat being too bland and rpm-ed, debian being too hard to configure right, libranet easy in every way, then back to debian because i learned more and was able to configure it better, etc. i am in no way a linux god.
anyone attempting to choose a linux distribution should visit www.distrowatch.com
------
i think the choice is debian... *dodging bullets*
it is easy to install [if you know how to configure X anyways...] and the easiest linux flavor to maintain [apt].
if debian is too hairy for you then try libranet linux [based off of debian woody, which adds a nicer installer, great hardware detection and custom window managers...]
think of the relationship of libranet to debian as "mandrake to red hat" and you should be fine.
also, libranet 2.7 came out with kde3, gnome2 and xfree86 4.2 way before they were in the debian sid tree. that seems quite humorous to me, anyways...
i don't know why so many distributions use rpm... it is horrible.
if you wanna dual boot use grub [thanx darin...] and put linux and windoze on their own harddrives, put linux as primary and windoze as secondary and use a chainloader to boot into windoze. windoze is too stupid to detect the primary hd, and if you run into any hairy situations you can always disconnect linux to do work on windoze [but honestly...it will be formated and used as extra storage for linux in a few months anyways so don't worry much about that...]
that's about all i can say... but it was a great call when i just went out and bought another hard-drive to install and test alot of other linux distributions...
edit: btw, libranet is 100% compatible with debian, but adds additional [somewhat proprietary...] packages like Xadminmenu for easy configuration of your linux box. just thought i would throw that info out there... oh, and libranet 2.0 is free to download but atm 2.7 is not free.
end of rambling...
mike
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.