namelesstavern.net

Would I get better performance out of games from running them in an emulated environment in linux than in Windows native?

No.

Then linux stays an iso on my HDD :P

My friend says that if I duelboot linux and XP Pro i'll lag more than I would if i just installed XP Pro or Linux by themselfs, is this true? (still putting my comp together)

If you want to play with Linux, just check out Floppix or another distro that you don't even have to install.

Jazendar wrote:My friend says that if I duelboot linux and XP Pro i'll lag more than I would if i just installed XP Pro or Linux by themselfs, is this true? (still putting my comp together)

No, that's completely untrue - one has nothing to do with the other.

Ubuntu

Gidan wrote:There is also <a href="http://www.knoppix.org/" target=_blank>Knoppix</a> This is a linux distro you can boot right off the CD and run a fully usable linux OS. There is a full description of it on the site. Make sure you click the US/British flag to translate the site to english. Great way to see linux without doing anything to your box.

whats the hacker version of Knoppix again? I forgot.

Anyways the bootable hax0r version of knoppix if a fucking great..

Lets just say you worked at a Navy base, and needed to download the WoW movie pre-release via bittorrent...

Now you knew the navy security guys would get pissed for running torrent on their networks but oh well you did it anyways, and then your crusty old govvy project manager got all over you ass about it like 10 times, basically bigtime whining overkill...

Well if one was so inclined they could get the password to the bosses computer via the bootable hacker knoppix CD and install some peer to peer software, which would bring the same security guys down on the boss making her look like a fucking TOTAL fool.

If you do this make sure you are planning on quitting within a month... You might be implicated if you stick around long enough.

did I say hacker version... I meant security distro.

May have been covered in topic before but I am lazy.

I just picked up an old iMac and want a thin linux distro for it. It's pretty gutless so the fewer bells and whistles, the better. Anyone have much luck on the PPC platform?

Diekan wrote:

Jazendar wrote:My friend says that if I duelboot linux and XP Pro i'll lag more than I would if i just installed XP Pro or Linux by themselfs, is this true? (still putting my comp together)

No, that's completely untrue - one has nothing to do with the other.

duel booting resulted in a slower machine for me

/shrug

I've had tons of dual boot machines and have never noticed a difference in the booting times of other OS as opposed to a single boot machine.

Dual booting should have no impact on performance at all.

I've had several dual boot machines, and the ones I tested performed identical in benchmarks with single or dual boot.

i heard basically the only reason to use linux is if you're compiling a lot of data... like if you're using it to run a business. the thing i hear about linux is that if you can't name ten reason that you should be using linux instead of windows, you shouldn't be using linux because there'll be no noticeable differences on the user-end. except of course, linux makes all its users smug, like hybrid cars

IMO Linux is a considerably better OS, however its not for everyone.

1. Windows can not compare to linux with security. If you are interested in true security on your system, linux is by far, more powerful.

2. Linux is also far more stable. I cant remember the last time I had to reboot my linux boxs because they crashed, Windows boxs on the otherhand constantly need to be rebooted just to function.

3. You can not customize a windows box even close to what you can a linux box. If your running a server, you can completely remove the GUI to free up system resources. If you want a flashy desktop, you can use enlightenment as a window manager, if you want minimal expended resources but still want a GUI you can use blackbox. Linux can be installed and run succesfully on a 256M usb drive, when is the last time windows could do that?

4. Open Source, Almost all linux software is open source. No need to wait on some corp to decide its financially time to upgrade their product. Open Office for example is every bit as good as MS Office and is constantly being updated.

5. Software, almost everything designed to run on windows can be run on linux (Includes WoW, EQ and EQ2). Maybe 1/4 of the software designed to run on linux can be run on windows.

6. Software support. Ever try and get software support from MS? If you can actually manage to understan the person who is talking to you and if he actually has a clue about what he is doing, you might be able to get some help. Compare that to the Open Source community support of their products and you will quickly see how bad MS support is.

7. OS Advancment. When was last major upgrade to Windows? Linux has been updated coutless times since windows was last updated. I am not talking about small updates to fix security flaws.

8. Forced reliance on MS. With windows, you are forced to rely on MS to provide you support and software upgrades to your OS. With linux, if you decide you cant stant the providers of your distro, you can choose to use a different oen. If you want ultimate provider support you can use RedHat or SuSE. If you like user base support, you can go with a disto like slackware or gentoo. Their are currently over 15 different major linux providers.


9. Viruses, I have never had a virus on my linux box's. I have never had to worry about spyware on my linux box's either. How many different Antivirus anti-spyware software packages do people use.

10. Price. How much does a full windows install go for these days? $300 for XP Pro, $200 for XP Pro upgrade. Linux is free.

Linux really can be a OS for the every day person. Their is a significant difference on the user level and it will take a very short time before you really start to see the differences.

Drem wrote:i heard basically the only reason to use linux is if you're compiling a lot of data... like if you're using it to run a business. the thing i hear about linux is that if you can't name ten reason that you should be using linux instead of windows, you shouldn't be using linux because there'll be no noticeable differences on the user-end. except of course, linux makes all its users smug, like hybrid cars

The only reason to use Linux over windows is if you'd rather spend hours upon hours of fiddly work to get a game to work in an emulator to save $300


Linux started out as a noble ideal, but has neither the stability of the UNIX systems it was stolen from, nor the software base that Windows has



if you're into attempting to writing your own code, Linux is great

It's open, and there's tons of shoddily written mostly incomplete documentation out there to frustrate you at every turn

Somewhat true. The only reason to use Windows over Unix is for Windows based games.

Most people do not game, so would be better served with Linux. The problem is corporate America is run by idiots who do not understand PCs/Technology. This will change as the current crop of engineers/techies become tomorrows CEOs and move more and more away from proprietary Windows software.

Everything Gidan says is true. The only problem right now is Windows is ubiquitous and MS gets their 50 bucks off almost every PC sold which is a bigger problem than most people realize. Lack of competition stifles innovation and allows for controlling technology that should be open, marketed, and won by better development.

the biggest problem with linux is there's 2578075895723498534225 flavours of it, all subtly different

The nice thing about Linux is it ranges from complete n00b: Lindows/Ubuntu, to intermediate user: Fedora Core/Suse, to advanced user: Gentoo/Slackware.

Installing Linux is just as easy as installing Windows in most cases. The big problem is most vendors do not offer or push Linux, because they fear the MS monopoly.

All larger Linux variants run Gnome/KDE, the same Linux kernel tools, a simple windows based package installer, and the mozilla/google tools.

My Linux backend server ran 722 days without a hiccup or interruption, running dozens more processes than even my newest Windows machine could.

The only reason not to run Linux is for gaming and proprietary windows apps.
The only reason I personally run Windows is due to work VPN software that requires it, and proprietary Windows work software I need.

WOW, EQ, NWN all run natively on Linux fine.

Gidan wrote:IMO Linux is a considerably better OS, however its not for everyone.

1. Windows can not compare to linux with security. If you are interested in true security on your system, linux is by far, more powerful.

2. Linux is also far more stable. I cant remember the last time I had to reboot my linux boxs because they crashed, Windows boxs on the otherhand constantly need to be rebooted just to function.

3. You can not customize a windows box even close to what you can a linux box. If your running a server, you can completely remove the GUI to free up system resources. If you want a flashy desktop, you can use enlightenment as a window manager, if you want minimal expended resources but still want a GUI you can use blackbox. Linux can be installed and run succesfully on a 256M usb drive, when is the last time windows could do that?

4. Open Source, Almost all linux software is open source. No need to wait on some corp to decide its financially time to upgrade their product. Open Office for example is every bit as good as MS Office and is constantly being updated.

5. Software, almost everything designed to run on windows can be run on linux (Includes WoW, EQ and EQ2). Maybe 1/4 of the software designed to run on linux can be run on windows.

6. Software support. Ever try and get software support from MS? If you can actually manage to understan the person who is talking to you and if he actually has a clue about what he is doing, you might be able to get some help. Compare that to the Open Source community support of their products and you will quickly see how bad MS support is.

7. OS Advancment. When was last major upgrade to Windows? Linux has been updated coutless times since windows was last updated. I am not talking about small updates to fix security flaws.

8. Forced reliance on MS. With windows, you are forced to rely on MS to provide you support and software upgrades to your OS. With linux, if you decide you cant stant the providers of your distro, you can choose to use a different oen. If you want ultimate provider support you can use RedHat or SuSE. If you like user base support, you can go with a disto like slackware or gentoo. Their are currently over 15 different major linux providers.


9. Viruses, I have never had a virus on my linux box's. I have never had to worry about spyware on my linux box's either. How many different Antivirus anti-spyware software packages do people use.

10. Price. How much does a full windows install go for these days? $300 for XP Pro, $200 for XP Pro upgrade. Linux is free.

Linux really can be a OS for the every day person. Their is a significant difference on the user level and it will take a very short time before you really start to see the differences.

Those aren't reasons to buy it, those are just personal opinions. Watch why most of them don't work as arguement points:

I use a windows PC and...

1. never had a security issue so i can't respond

2. my cpu never freezes or crashes. i restart it every week because it's healthy for the electronics, though

3. GUI i don't even know what you mean so for running servers i'm sure this is a valid reason....

4. open source makes no difference to me whatsoever

5. this doesn't matter to me either because i don't play games but eq

6. this doesn't matter to me either because i figure out my own software issues and if i can't figure it out, i delete it

7. who cares? you can customize windows so endlessly that OS improvements should be negligent. what do you want, anyways?

8. don't even know what you're talking about. i've never felt reliant on MS for anything. i fix my own problems and make my own adjustments...

9. i've had like 3 viruses in four years on my windows box, because it's the only OS that xxxxx amount of viruses work on. that really doesn't make me wants to use a new OS

10. once again, this is a stupid arguement point. i paid $0 for my copies windows xp pro, adobe acrobat, adobe photoshop, and MS office suite.


What my friend is talking about is if you can't list 10 REAL reasons to use Linux, you should just be using windows. i just use windows and i was able to shoot down 9/10 of your points with basic reasoning ...

Linux is like the indie music of computers... it's like a shitload of people use it and have no reason for using that makes it better than windows except self-gratification and thinking that you're "beating the system"

maybe MS windows is an industry standard because it's the best for what it's used for? linux isn't used for home PC use, it's used for business and other things... using it at home is just a self-induced headache of coolness and i feel way better knowing that my computer can play a lot of things that yours can't. haha

well

the main reason for Linux is that if you're a coder, and you've got a chunk of software that doesn't QUITE do what you want, with MS, you have to wait for them to change it

with Linux, you can fuck around and do it yourself

Tikker wrote:well

the main reason for Linux is that if you're a coder, and you've got a chunk of software that doesn't QUITE do what you want, with MS, you have to wait for them to change it

with Linux, you can fuck around and do it yourself

The main reason for Linux is it does everything Windows does, but without paying around 100 dollars per copy, which is a nice savings.

Very few people do any OS level coding. Most just want base functionality on an older PC with newer apps like Firefox, Thunderbird, and easy Internet connectivity. Linux provides all of those.

There's a problem when one company is making hundreds of billions of dollars on a single program, and companies have no option but selling that program.

Those aren't reasons to buy it, those are just personal opinions. Watch why most of them don't work as arguement points:

Linux is free. Why pay for something you don't need?

Drem wrote:maybe MS windows is an industry standard because it's the best for what it's used for? linux isn't used for home PC use, it's used for business and other things... using it at home is just a self-induced headache of coolness and i feel way better knowing that my computer can play a lot of things that yours can't. haha

I have to completely disagree with you on this. Linux works great as a home PC. Hell the games I play actually play better under linux then they do on windows. I have far fewer headaches running linux then I do windows. Windows is simply unstable. I have yet to run across something that I couldn't run on my linux box. In general linux runs them better due to the OS handling memory and CPU usage being far superior to windows. Not to mention the damn windows memory leak.

One of the largest faults of windows is its lack of a truely powerful console, though it would appear that vista is taking care of that issue.

Finally the import point of the whole thing. Linux is free. I am not talking about a pirated copy, I am talkign legally free. For those with "free" copies of windows. What do you think the chances of the Vista upgrade checking to make sure the version of XP is valid before allowing the upgrade? It would sure make MS alot of money. Sure people have been able to get around the validation check for updates, but so for no one has gotten around the validation check on Ms Defender or IE7. I would expect a similar check on Vista upgrades from XP.

Why pay for windows, when you can run a more stable OS that can run almost all windows software just as easily as windows does? Not to mention small little extra features that you may not use now but might be useful in the future.

If you like XP and want to stick with Windows, thats cool, everyone has their preferences. Keep an open mind however, just because some dont find linux useful doesn't mean its not. Their are a few people here who use or have used linux as a primary OS, I would guess that none of us do it for bragging rights, but because its what we prefer.

i hear PS3 will come w/ built-in linux. hello hackers

and jesus christ, why do you guys keep bringing up cost? both OS are free, as far as i'm concerned. if you pay for software of any kind at all, you should just throw your computer out the window.

and yeah, no shit linux can run games better... the OS is about 1/10000000000000000 the size of windows... the point i'm saying is that linux is totally needless for an everyday CPU user. it doesn't do anything that windows can't do for general purposes. i don't know a single person that willingly uses linux except on seperate boxes that they use when they need to code or hack things, like when we tried to unfuck an ATA that wouldn't unlock. the only ppl i know that use linux on their main CPUs are people that use their computers for work.

maybe you guys should make banners like finawin's that say LINUX USER. so everyone will know how cool you are

Drem wrote:if you pay for software of any kind at all, you should just throw your computer out the window.

Would you kindly mind elaborating on this point?