Jump to content

Welcome to Geeks to Go - Register now for FREE

Geeks To Go is a helpful hub, where thousands of volunteer geeks quickly serve friendly answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts. Register now to gain access to all of our features, it's FREE and only takes one minute. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more.

Create Account How it Works
Photo

linux vs. windows


  • Please log in to reply

#16
friedpooodle

friedpooodle

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
Also, I have an older computer just for toying around with and was wondering if it could support ubuntu.

eMachines etower 466is
160 MBs RAM
intel inside celeron pprocessor
maybe 2/3 gigs of free space?

If it's able to, this would be the only OS on it (due to lack of free space). Could it happen?
  • 0

Advertisements


#17
Dragon

Dragon

    All Around Computer Nut

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,682 posts
I was just making a suggestion so you wouldn't have to worry about corrupting your windows install, I run my dual boot on seperate Hard drives. and actually they would both be set to master
  • 0

#18
Dragon

Dragon

    All Around Computer Nut

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,682 posts

Also, I have an older computer just for toying around with and was wondering if it could support ubuntu. 

eMachines etower 466is
160 MBs RAM
intel inside celeron pprocessor
maybe 2/3 gigs of free space?

If it's able to, this would be the only OS on it (due to lack of free space).  Could it happen?

View Post

I have ubuntu on a 5 gig harddrive, all in all I still have 3 gigs left after installing other programs on it.
  • 0

#19
friedpooodle

friedpooodle

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
Yea, this is actually about a 4 1/2 gig. But I'm just wondering about the RAM being 160. Will that be enough for it to operate at a decent speed?
  • 0

#20
Dragon

Dragon

    All Around Computer Nut

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,682 posts
The minimum system requirements, as listed by the installer are at least 1.8 gigs of hard drive space and 32 megs of ram. For a base system, you only need about 360 megs of disk space.
  • 0

#21
friedpooodle

friedpooodle

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
Awesome. So it should work fine?
  • 0

#22
Dragon

Dragon

    All Around Computer Nut

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,682 posts
yeah it should
  • 0

#23
mingus

mingus

    New Member

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
friedpoodle -

I stumbled across your post and questions of a couple of weeks ago, and am glad you are interested in Linux. I thought this additional information might be helpful.

I use SuSE for my personal system and also for sysadmin on my SOHO. It is a very strong system, has very good documentation, there is a huge amount of rpm's, and a very strong technical community, At the same time, SuSE states that it targets "ambitious" and "power" users, and they mean that. One needs to be patient and do the homework, because there is a lot there and therefore a lot to learn. SuSE's default interface is KDE; gnome can be made to work but you give up a lot in SuSE without KDE.

KDE is the most widely used interface with Linux, 2x the next one, Gnome. KDE originated in Europe, Gnome in the U.S. KDE has more functions and applications than Gnome, It also is more granular, so you can control it at a very detailed level. There is a great deal of artwork for KDE, and many feel it has more of a Windows look.

Ubuntu I deliver to my clients. It attempts to "just work" out of the box, and is targeted primarily at new users. It is still a bit new, so the next release (about Oct) should be important. Ubuntu uses Gnome, which is more tightly integrated and has a more consistent look-n-feel that KDE. Gnome is somewhat mac-like and for a brand new Linux user, might be a bit easier to learn. Ubuntu is based up the very popular Debian distribution, which has more packages than any other by far. One small downside with Ubuntu is that they are very strict about not including any commercial or patented software. Thereafter, you need to perform a number of manual steps after installation to, for example, get the codecs to play MP3's. Ubuntu has outstanding user-level documentation and a fantastic community.

The suggestion about trying live-cd's is a good one. However, keep in mind that what you see is the default interfaces. With Gnome and in particular with KDE (which most use) you can literally make the interface look and behave anyway you want to . . .

you asked about the differences with Linux, and this is one of them. You have 100x the amount of control and flexibility with Linux. You can see exactly what is happening and why. You can change almost anything, if you really want to. A second (there are quite a few, I'm just sharing two) difference is free software - thousands of applications.

Finally, about the hardware requirements. The Linux kernel can run in very little RAM. There are a few distros like [bleep] Small Linux that have a custom interface with the kernel, and can be run from a memory stick. If you install SuSE and Ubuntu however, the biggest decision you have to make affecting hardware is the GUI. Both KDE and Gnome use approx 100MB. Now, there are other GUI's available with these distros, such as WindowMaker, Fluxbox, and XFCE4. These are lean and mean, and there is some nice artwork for WM, but they are not the large integrated GUI's that you may expect if you are comparing it to XP.

Hope this is useful. Give Linux a try. It's well worth the effort. :tazz:
  • 0

#24
Dragon

Dragon

    All Around Computer Nut

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,682 posts

Ubuntu uses Gnome, which is more tightly integrated and has a more consistent look-n-feel that KDE.


just a little note, Ubuntu now has Kubuntu, with KDE as a default desktop for those that prefer KDE. I personally prefer Gnome over KDE, I also feel that Gnome looks and acts more like windows then KDE. Not trying to start an arguement or anything, just my opinion.
  • 0

#25
mingus

mingus

    New Member

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
Gnome vs KDE often turns into a pointless religous argument. After all, Linux is about choice and there is room for more than one GUI. So, good point.

Just one fyi re Kubuntu: As a KDE user, this was my preference. However, it became clear that there are a lot more dev resources going into Ubuntu. Kubuntu is a community branch. So at least for now, there is more integration, app set up, and documentation for the Gnome implementation. This is not to discourage anyone from using Kubuntu, but just to share that as far as KDE integration is concerned, it is not *yet* at the level of other KDE/Debian distros and and is definitely a work-in-progress.
  • 0

Advertisements


#26
Dragon

Dragon

    All Around Computer Nut

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,682 posts
I agree completely, they even say that it is still fairly "unstable" but they hope to have that issue Ironed out when they come out wiht Breezy Badger in October.
  • 0

#27
fleamailman

fleamailman

    Member 2k

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,383 posts
I have tried a lot of distros and somehow I always return to kubuntu. What surprised me was just how much better linux is over windows in terms of being malware free on the one hand while not having to pay for stuff like office(since open office deals will excel and word), protection like norton or the like, or even having to pay for the os or the upgrade, (Example, I started with drapper kubuntu, upgraded to eigy and am now on feisty, whereas imagine if that had been Windows 98, XP and then vista).


The other point as I think pointed out before is that the live CD tells you if the drivers are all working before one goes for the install itself, and if the drivers are not found one just tries another distro which has them, must be at least thirty types of distros if not many more. Total agreement with the people who don't fight over distros then since the distro type reflects the need in hand so in some cases I like kubuntu for ease, whereas I like puppy for using as live CD, and knoppix for mending XP problems. In fact, I believe that it is best to try out other distros from time to time just to see that what one has is actually the best for what one wants.

Time was when linux very all geeky but these days most of it is gui based so something like kubuntu will install very much like windows does but offering the dual boot too.
  • 0

#28
dudefromjapan

dudefromjapan

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 39 posts
I just want to clarify something. So is it possible to install SuSe 10.2 in the same hard drive as Windows XP without having the partition erase all the data in Windows XP?
  • 0

#29
ditto

ditto

    - i pwn n00bs -

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts

I just want to clarify something. So is it possible to install SuSe 10.2 in the same hard drive as Windows XP without having the partition erase all the data in Windows XP?


If you have room on your hard drive then you dont need to delete any data on the XP drive. Just parition your drive in the installer and go.

You could also have a virtual desktop which will emulate linux/xp in xp/linux respectively. I have tried this but was hard on my computer.

Here's what it looks like:
Ubuntu on Windows XP
XP on Ubuntu
  • 0

#30
dudefromjapan

dudefromjapan

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 39 posts
Thank you ditto for the info. That makes me less worried about trying out linux on my pc. Thanks again.
  • 0






Similar Topics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

As Featured On:

Microsoft Yahoo BBC MSN PC Magazine Washington Post HP