> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:32:58 +0000, yowie wrote:
>> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:34:58 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:
>>> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:26:04 +0000, yowie wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:02:36 -0500, John Fuhrer wrote:
>>>>> Ubuntu has a long road to haul before installing even this >>>>> popular Linux distro is the no-brainer that helps makes Windows the >>>>> success it is among regular PC users.
>>>> Bollocks. How many of these no-brainers actually install Windows >>>> themselves?
>>> A tiny percentage I would think.
>>> For example upgrading from XP (the most common OS in the world today) >>> to Vista7, is *FAR* more complex than installing Ubuntu 9.10 on a >>> Windows machine, as there is no 'upgrade' button for XP. The required >>> procedure is a *new* Vista7 install.
>>> After a new Ubuntu 9.10 install on a Xp machine, Windows will be added >>> to the boot manager along with Ubuntu and the user can select which OS >>> to boot into.
>>> A new Vista7 install will just wipe everything else off the hard drive, >>> including XP.
>>> Linux wins again ...
>> I've installed every version of Ubuntu since the first one. Only had a >> failure to boot once - Hardy I think. Had to disable acpi.
>> Sure I've had to install a driver or two but same with winblows.
>> I have a copy of Vista on my laptop and I'm entitled to a free (as in US >> $20 for postage and handling 'free') 'upgrade' to winblows 7.
> I appreciate your use of quotes around the word 'free', as it's clearly > *not* free.
> The trolls keep telling us that Microsoft have billions in the bank, and > are a monster compared to any Linux company, yet Ubuntu will send you a > free CD, and even pay postage, but Microsoft charges $20 (when someone > has already paid for vista on a new machine).
Microsoft don't charge $20, HP charges $20. Some charge less, some are free. I think I have seen one that charges more.
>> I have a copy of Vista on my laptop and I'm entitled to a free (as in US >> $20 for postage and handling 'free') 'upgrade' to winblows 7. After >> reading about the process there's no way I'm putting in money or time for >> an OS I'm only going to use for 20 minutes a month - if that. Hell, even >> after removing all HP's crapware and switching off as much useless >> autostart rubbish as I could find, vista /still/ takes twice as long to >> boot as Karmic.
> Unlike XP you can upgrade vista to win7. > The reason you can't do it from XP is because the system registry on XP will > have been altered by the applications. > The system registry in vista and win7 is protected from the applications and > application registry changes are kept separate. > An upgrade would require knowledge of each change an application has made > and how to change it. > It is just about impossible. > Win7 boots about twice as fast as vista so if your figures are correct it > will be as fast as karmic. > CCleaner will remove the cr@pware easily BTW. > I recommend you don't do it anyway, if you actually use win7 you will know > how good it actually is.
I think Microsoft made a huge blunder not offering some kind of upgrade from XP. This is going to hurt the initial adoption of Windows 7 by corporations who don't have the time to scratch load systems, even if it's semi-automated.
That being said, Windows 7 is incredible. They really got this one right, unlike Vista IMHO.
I've moved my DAW machines over to Windows 7 from XP (fresh loads) and with the exception of one MIDI interface manufacturer who refuses to provide x64 drivers, all is running great.
My latency is down around 1.5msec using Ivory, which in itself is incredible. Windows 7 looks gorgeous when themed, the GUI is easy to use and the taskbar based system works great.
I like how you can drag windows up to the top of the screen to minimize or maximize them, the previews in the taksbar look sharp and clear and you can drag windows that are larger than the secondary monitor over to the secondary monitor and they automatically resize, unlike XP.
All controls and settings are in one place, control panel. The search/find function is much more powerful allowing easy network searches. and so forth.
I haven't found anything I don't like yet and it installed perfectly and with the exception of mPlayer which seems to be having troubles, everything works. No surprise there BTW. I'ts open source so I don't expect it to work without some teeth pulling.
Booting over to Ubuntu 9.10 is a huge letdown after running Windows 7. Ubuntu looks flat and lifeless in comparison and runs just about as bad as can be. Slow and buggy is the best terms I can come up with. Oh, it boots real fast though. Much faster than 9.04. Who cares? The ugly factor kills it.
> [...] > That being said, Windows 7 is incredible. > They really got this one right, unlike Vista IMHO.
'Sfunny, my experience with it is just the opposite after playing with both the 32-/64-bit BETAs and RCs from January 2009 through September.
> [...] > Windows 7 looks gorgeous when themed, the GUI is easy to use and the > taskbar based system works great.
Odd. One of my biggest complaints about Win7 is the lack of a Classic Menu (though a free 3rd-party app is available for that) and the hosed taskbar. Note the ridiculous taskbar launcher spacing in Win7 vs. Vista:
If one places more than 7 launchers in the taskbar, everything hits the fan; by the time the RC became available I discovered the only solution was to place all the launchers in a separate desktop folder ["APPS" in this example]:
And what really screwed Win7 was Microsoft removing 1000s of printers from the database going back over 10 years -- many HP printers no longer are available to be selected like they are in Win2K, WinXP and Vista. This REALLY sucks dead bunnies through a straw.
My Win7 64-bit test system (Intel E8500 3.16GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, two identical boot disks) exhibits the same boot times for Vista SP2 and Win7 so, from my point of view, Win7 is a crippled downgrade from a properly configured Vista box.
Thus, I've since blown-away all my Win7 installs since I was never going to use them again. MS really shot themselves in the foot with Win7 and they're going to be limping as their sales slump once more people wise up to the wool MS is pulling over their eyes with all the Win7 hype.
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:36:42 -0500, John Fuhrer wrote: > This is going to hurt the initial adoption of Windows 7 by corporations > who don't have the time to scratch load systems, even if it's > semi-automated.
Why would any corporation "upgrade" anything? Doesn't make sense. They would make a Win7 Image from scratch and use that everywhere.
cf wrote: > DFS wrote: >> Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> Now, if one's install of Ubuntu came from a vendor such as DELL, that >>> would be a different story. In that case, though, DELL would deserve >>> the blame for not getting Ubuntu properly configured for their >>> hardware. >> Dell wouldn't do that. Dell cares about their reputation. Dell respects >> its customers. Dell doesn't toss out crap willy-nilly like the OSS world >> does just because it's the month of April and October. > you better look into Dell's "reputation" lately. Crap hardware, cheap > components, etc. They do toss out crap willy-nilly. People have gotten > fired for buying Dell, unlike in the old days of IBM (before Lenovo).
Maybe YOU should look into Dell lately. My employer uses Dell by preference. The problems they DO have generally are not with the Dell equipment. ___________________________________________________________________________ ____ http://www.lulu.com/billsey
> cf wrote: >> DFS wrote: >>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> Now, if one's install of Ubuntu came from a vendor such as DELL, that >>>> would be a different story. In that case, though, DELL would deserve >>>> the blame for not getting Ubuntu properly configured for their >>>> hardware.
>>> Dell wouldn't do that. Dell cares about their reputation. Dell respects >>> its customers. Dell doesn't toss out crap willy-nilly like the OSS world >>> does just because it's the month of April and October.
>> you better look into Dell's "reputation" lately. Crap hardware, cheap >> components, etc. They do toss out crap willy-nilly. People have gotten >> fired for buying Dell, unlike in the old days of IBM (before Lenovo).
> Maybe YOU should look into Dell lately. My employer uses Dell by preference. > The problems they DO have generally are not with the Dell equipment.
Our (another outfit that uses DELL) mileage varies.
Actually, I like my DELL Latitude D820... 15" widescreen, 1920x1200, a bit underspec'ed these days at 2 Gb and dual core.
However, I don't like its heaviness, bulkiness, heat-generation, and crap battery life (even when the battery was new).
For the opposite reasons, I prefer my Acer 4810T.
(There is one odd issue lately on the Acer... OpenOffice takes a very long time to start up. This has been happening only recently. [Fedora update?])
-- Don't tell any big lies today. Small ones can be just as effective.
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:36:42 -0500, John Fuhrer wrote:
>> This is going to hurt the initial adoption of Windows 7 by corporations >> who don't have the time to scratch load systems, even if it's >> semi-automated.
> Why would any corporation "upgrade" anything? Doesn't make sense. They > would make a Win7 Image from scratch and use that everywhere.
That's what I would do, but not having an upgrade path from XP is a major complaint according to what I read.
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:00:25 -0800, Thad Floryan wrote: > On 11/7/2009 12:36 AM, John Fuhrer wrote: >> [...] >> That being said, Windows 7 is incredible. >> They really got this one right, unlike Vista IMHO.
> 'Sfunny, my experience with it is just the opposite after playing with both > the 32-/64-bit BETAs and RCs from January 2009 through September.
Was using them both myself, but only for testing.
>> [...] >> Windows 7 looks gorgeous when themed, the GUI is easy to use and the >> taskbar based system works great.
> Odd. One of my biggest complaints about Win7 is the lack of a Classic Menu > (though a free 3rd-party app is available for that) and the hosed taskbar. > Note the ridiculous taskbar launcher spacing in Win7 vs. Vista:
Ever play with the start menu in the new kUbuntu? Talk about a mess. The sliding menus cause the user to hunt all over for things.
Mine doesn't look like that? What kind of video card and resolution are you using?
> If one places more than 7 launchers in the taskbar, everything hits the fan; > by the time the RC became available I discovered the only solution was to > place all the launchers in a separate desktop folder ["APPS" in this example]:
I prefer a cleaner look so I don't set up like that. Microsoft seems to have copied some of the elements of OSX. If a person likes OSX they will probably like the way Win7 does things. If not, they won't.
I can understand your point though.
> And what really screwed Win7 was Microsoft removing 1000s of printers from > the database going back over 10 years -- many HP printers no longer are > available to be selected like they are in Win2K, WinXP and Vista. This REALLY > sucks dead bunnies through a straw.
At some point it's time to move on. Newer printers are more efficient.
If you're interested in ancient hardware, Linux is the ticket. I doubt any system supports more dot matrix and daisywheel printers than Linux does.
> My Win7 64-bit test system (Intel E8500 3.16GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, two > identical boot disks) exhibits the same boot times for Vista SP2 and Win7 so, > from my point of view, Win7 is a crippled downgrade from a properly configured > Vista box.
Not when it comes to doing professional audio it doesn't. Vista was a dog due to DPC spiking and other problems which is why audio professionals avoided it like the plague.
Win7 is a major change.
I get lower latencey, can run more plugins and get overall smoother performance on the same machine with Windows 7 than I did with XP.
Intel 9400 2.66ghz with 4G ram and very fast SATA drives.
> Thus, I've since blown-away all my Win7 installs since I was never going > to use them again. MS really shot themselves in the foot with Win7 and > they're going to be limping as their sales slump once more people wise up > to the wool MS is pulling over their eyes with all the Win7 hype.
Good for you, but your experience isn't typical with either Vista or Windows 7.
Use what works, but I wouldn't touch Vista with a barge pole.
And I didn't. Never ran it and have no intention of doing so.
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:00:25 -0800, Thad Floryan wrote: > [...] > Ever play with the start menu in the new kUbuntu? > Talk about a mess. > The sliding menus cause the user to hunt all over for things.
Heh! Makes one wonder if anyone actually tests and uses such menus.
> Mine doesn't look like that? > What kind of video card and resolution are you using?
It's powered-down right now; it's either an (EVGA or PNY) (9600 or 9800) GT at 1280x1024 @ 60Hz (which is the "native" setting for my NEC LCD display) on a 16-port IOGEAR Miniview Ultra KVM switch (2 ganged model GCS128).
I tried a friend's system with a different (wider) monitor and there still was no way to get the launcher icons close together on the taskbar like on Vista or XP.
> [...] >> And what really screwed Win7 was Microsoft removing 1000s of printers from >> the database going back over 10 years -- many HP printers no longer are >> available to be selected like they are in Win2K, WinXP and Vista. This REALLY >> sucks dead bunnies through a straw.
> At some point it's time to move on. > Newer printers are more efficient.
The HP4050 line is/was one of HP's best line, a real workhorse. Every client for whom I've done Linux consulting since the late 1990s (including even Levanta aka Linuxcare (now belly up)) has at least one HP4050 as I do. It is power efficient and (mine) still prints better than newer HP laser printers such as the P2015dn series (which I also have). You can see my HP4050 in the background and my HP P2015dn to the left of the LCD monitor here:
> If you're interested in ancient hardware, Linux is the ticket. > I doubt any system supports more dot matrix and daisywheel printers than > Linux does.
Heh! I've been laser-printer-only since the early 1990s.
However --
I do still have and occasionally use a 100MHz Pentium-S system (64MB RAM, 40 bogomips, kernel 2.0.36, Red Hat 5.2) due to its SCSI buses operating with some unique peripherals, and a Sun SPARC IPX with Red Hat 4.2 for the same purpose.
>> My Win7 64-bit test system (Intel E8500 3.16GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, two >> identical boot disks) exhibits the same boot times for Vista SP2 and Win7 so, >> from my point of view, Win7 is a crippled downgrade from a properly configured >> Vista box.
> Not when it comes to doing professional audio it doesn't. > Vista was a dog due to DPC spiking and other problems which is why audio > professionals avoided it like the plague.
> Win7 is a major change.
> I get lower latencey, can run more plugins and get overall smoother > performance on the same machine with Windows 7 than I did with XP.
> Intel 9400 2.66ghz with 4G ram and very fast SATA drives.
Hmmm. I'm just didn't see any improvement with Win7 over Vista (considering that my Vista systems are highly tweaked and also have fast SATA drives). I tested VLC without any problems on Vista (and did on Win7, too). I suppose we do different things with our computers (I'm a software developer and prefer to play music and DVDs on dedicated systems instead of a PC).
>> Thus, I've since blown-away all my Win7 installs since I was never going >> to use them again. MS really shot themselves in the foot with Win7 and >> they're going to be limping as their sales slump once more people wise up >> to the wool MS is pulling over their eyes with all the Win7 hype.
> Good for you, but your experience isn't typical with either Vista or > Windows 7.
That's true. The funny thing is, the only reason I bought a Vista system back in May 2008 was to run Microsoft Research's WorldWide Telescope (I've been an amateur astronomer since the early 1950s) because the WWT wouldn't run on my WinXP system. I ended up learning Vista, liked what I saw, and bought 4 more over the following 8 months. I have a complete CD full with instructions and 3rd-party stuff that's required to make Vista work well and, interestingly, the same fixes need to be applied to Win7, too, proving it's still Vista. :-)
My Vista systems bootup faster than any of my Linux or UNIX systems even on the same hardware; I have many double-/triple-boot systems (e.g., Solaris 10 + Fedora10 + Vista-SP2; Centos 5.2 + FreeBSD 7.0 + Vista-SP2; etc etc).
> Use what works, but I wouldn't touch Vista with a barge pole.
> And I didn't. > Never ran it and have no intention of doing so.
At least we have choices, though there's no way I'm going to be using or running Win7 here after extensive testing of both the Win7 BETA and RC builds.
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:55:05 -0800, Thad Floryan wrote: > On 11/7/2009 9:38 AM, John Fuhrer wrote: >> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:00:25 -0800, Thad Floryan wrote: >> [...] >> Ever play with the start menu in the new kUbuntu? >> Talk about a mess. >> The sliding menus cause the user to hunt all over for things.
> Heh! Makes one wonder if anyone actually tests and uses such menus.
Sometimes I do wonder !! I guess it boils down to what people like. I actually prefer it simple, but nice looking at the same time.
>> Mine doesn't look like that? >> What kind of video card and resolution are you using?
> It's powered-down right now; it's either an (EVGA or PNY) (9600 or 9800) GT > at 1280x1024 @ 60Hz (which is the "native" setting for my NEC LCD display) > on a 16-port IOGEAR Miniview Ultra KVM switch (2 ganged model GCS128).
> I tried a friend's system with a different (wider) monitor and there still > was no way to get the launcher icons close together on the taskbar like on > Vista or XP.
I can't figure out how to get them closer either but mine have more space between them. I'm using 22 inch wide screen LCD's.
>> [...] >>> And what really screwed Win7 was Microsoft removing 1000s of printers from >>> the database going back over 10 years -- many HP printers no longer are >>> available to be selected like they are in Win2K, WinXP and Vista. This REALLY >>> sucks dead bunnies through a straw.
>> At some point it's time to move on. >> Newer printers are more efficient.
> The HP4050 line is/was one of HP's best line, a real workhorse. Every client > for whom I've done Linux consulting since the late 1990s (including even > Levanta aka Linuxcare (now belly up)) has at least one HP4050 as I do. It is > power efficient and (mine) still prints better than newer HP laser printers > such as the P2015dn series (which I also have). You can see my HP4050 in the > background and my HP P2015dn to the left of the LCD monitor here:
HP has gone downhill in recent years, sadly. The original LaserJet 5P (I think?) was built like a tank!
>> If you're interested in ancient hardware, Linux is the ticket. >> I doubt any system supports more dot matrix and daisywheel printers than >> Linux does.
> Heh! I've been laser-printer-only since the early 1990s.
Smart person!! More expensive initially, but much, much cheaper in the long run compared to say ink jets.
> However --
> I do still have and occasionally use a 100MHz Pentium-S system (64MB RAM, > 40 bogomips, kernel 2.0.36, Red Hat 5.2) due to its SCSI buses operating > with some unique peripherals, and a Sun SPARC IPX with Red Hat 4.2 for > the same purpose.
Nothing like Linux to bring new life to old machines! Seriously!
>>> My Win7 64-bit test system (Intel E8500 3.16GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, two >>> identical boot disks) exhibits the same boot times for Vista SP2 and Win7 so, >>> from my point of view, Win7 is a crippled downgrade from a properly configured >>> Vista box.
>> Not when it comes to doing professional audio it doesn't. >> Vista was a dog due to DPC spiking and other problems which is why audio >> professionals avoided it like the plague.
>> Win7 is a major change.
>> I get lower latencey, can run more plugins and get overall smoother >> performance on the same machine with Windows 7 than I did with XP.
>> Intel 9400 2.66ghz with 4G ram and very fast SATA drives.
> Hmmm. I'm just didn't see any improvement with Win7 over Vista (considering > that my Vista systems are highly tweaked and also have fast SATA drives). > I tested VLC without any problems on Vista (and did on Win7, too). I suppose > we do different things with our computers (I'm a software developer and > prefer to play music and DVDs on dedicated systems instead of a PC).
You won't see it playing back music for the most part however when recording the latency is very important to avoid delay's between the playing and hearing yourself playing in time with the other tracks.
The DPC spiking issues will cause clicks and pops in the audio tracks and video artifacts in video tracks.
Some boards were worse than others, but overall, Vista was a poor choice for professionals doing the above.
Windows 7 OTOH has gotten rave reviews from the same community that clobbered Vista so things are different even though the 2 systems look very similar on the outside.
>>> Thus, I've since blown-away all my Win7 installs since I was never going >>> to use them again. MS really shot themselves in the foot with Win7 and >>> they're going to be limping as their sales slump once more people wise up >>> to the wool MS is pulling over their eyes with all the Win7 hype.
>> Good for you, but your experience isn't typical with either Vista or >> Windows 7.
> That's true. The funny thing is, the only reason I bought a Vista system > back in May 2008 was to run Microsoft Research's WorldWide Telescope (I've > been an amateur astronomer since the early 1950s) because the WWT wouldn't > run on my WinXP system. I ended up learning Vista, liked what I saw, and > bought 4 more over the following 8 months. I have a complete CD full with > instructions and 3rd-party stuff that's required to make Vista work well and, > interestingly, the same fixes need to be applied to Win7, too, proving it's > still Vista. :-)
I can relate! Even after all my research, I got caught cold dead with a MIDI interface that had no 64 bit drivers. I misread the website and din't realize that the model that did have the drivers, despite having the same name, was the newer model and mine, the older model was not supported. Oh well, live and learn.
> My Vista systems bootup faster than any of my Linux or UNIX systems even on > the same hardware; I have many double-/triple-boot systems (e.g., Solaris 10 > + Fedora10 + Vista-SP2; Centos 5.2 + FreeBSD 7.0 + Vista-SP2; etc etc).
>> Use what works, but I wouldn't touch Vista with a barge pole.
>> And I didn't. >> Never ran it and have no intention of doing so.
> At least we have choices, though there's no way I'm going to be using or > running Win7 here after extensive testing of both the Win7 BETA and RC > builds.
I always say use what works for you !! For some it's Windows, others OSX and still others Linux or BSD.
Choose your applications first and then pick your OS!
>> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:36:42 -0500, John Fuhrer wrote:
>>> This is going to hurt the initial adoption of Windows 7 by corporations >>> who don't have the time to scratch load systems, even if it's >>> semi-automated.
>> Why would any corporation "upgrade" anything? Doesn't make sense. They >> would make a Win7 Image from scratch and use that everywhere.
> That's what I would do, but not having an upgrade path from XP is a major > complaint according to what I read.
I work for a major school district and for us the big issue is that XP still suits our needs for the most part. In addition we still have some older hardware with 512Mb of memory. We could upgrade the memory and purchase Windows 7, but cost/benefit just doesn't make sense. I work support in schools, so am not involved in licensing issues, but from what I understand the licensing requirements get wierd in upgrading across our district. Unlike XP where we have and Enterprise license key which works across the district, mostly just a base image that we create and each tech may tweak it for a schools needs. I think the licensing of individual machines in the upgrade to Win7 from what I understand is somehow controlled by a server. I don't know any details for sure and it doesn't yet affect me in the field one way or the other, but this I was "told" was one of the issues.
Above the wailing & moaning of the trolls, Thad Floryan was heard to say:
> On 11/7/2009 9:38 AM, John Fuhrer wrote: >> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:00:25 -0800, Thad Floryan wrote: >> [...] >> Ever play with the start menu in the new kUbuntu? >> Talk about a mess. >> The sliding menus cause the user to hunt all over for things.
> Heh! Makes one wonder if anyone actually tests and uses such menus.
Bugger off, windroid & take the Flatfish troll with you.
<snip garbage>
-- Linux. The Malicious Software Removal tool which wipes Windows from your PC in seconds!
> No it wont. I'm talking about trial versions of MS Office, various DVD > burners, webcam viewers, links to stupid online flash games and other 3rd > party apps provided by HP.
I take it you haven't tried it.
> It took me about 45 minutes to clean out that > stuff I'll never use and Vista still uses up nearly 40 G of HD space. > For what?
>> I recommend you don't do >> it anyway, if you actually use win7 you will know how good it actually >> is.
> I hope it's a fast, secure and flexible OS. Microsoft's victims deserve > that. I'll probably never use it at home. Just doesn't appeal. I don't > use Linux because I dislike windows, I just find it more interesting > apart from anything else.
I tend to find applications interesting, OSes should be as boring as hell and as invisible as possible.
On 2009-11-07, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> (There is one odd issue lately on the Acer... OpenOffice takes a very long > time to start up. This has been happening only recently. [Fedora update?])
What version is it? I'm still using 3.1.1 here (gentoo, built and running on a 7 year old Pentium 2.4G).
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:30:41 +0000, dennis@home wrote: > "Terry Porter" <linu...@netspace.net.au> wrote in message > news:iOSdnclLzq61lWjXnZ2dnUVZ_gFi4p2d@netspace.net.au... >> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:32:58 +0000, yowie wrote:
>>> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:34:58 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:26:04 +0000, yowie wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:02:36 -0500, John Fuhrer wrote:
>>>>>> Ubuntu has a long road to haul before installing even this >>>>>> popular Linux distro is the no-brainer that helps makes Windows the >>>>>> success it is among regular PC users.
>>>>> Bollocks. How many of these no-brainers actually install Windows >>>>> themselves?
>>>> A tiny percentage I would think.
>>>> For example upgrading from XP (the most common OS in the world today) >>>> to Vista7, is *FAR* more complex than installing Ubuntu 9.10 on a >>>> Windows machine, as there is no 'upgrade' button for XP. The required >>>> procedure is a *new* Vista7 install.
>>>> After a new Ubuntu 9.10 install on a Xp machine, Windows will be >>>> added to the boot manager along with Ubuntu and the user can select >>>> which OS to boot into.
>>>> A new Vista7 install will just wipe everything else off the hard >>>> drive, including XP.
>>>> Linux wins again ...
>>> I've installed every version of Ubuntu since the first one. Only had >>> a failure to boot once - Hardy I think. Had to disable acpi.
>>> Sure I've had to install a driver or two but same with winblows.
>>> I have a copy of Vista on my laptop and I'm entitled to a free (as in >>> US $20 for postage and handling 'free') 'upgrade' to winblows 7.
>> I appreciate your use of quotes around the word 'free', as it's clearly >> *not* free.
>> The trolls keep telling us that Microsoft have billions in the bank, >> and are a monster compared to any Linux company, yet Ubuntu will send >> you a free CD, and even pay postage, but Microsoft charges $20 (when >> someone has already paid for vista on a new machine).
> Microsoft don't charge $20, HP charges $20. Some charge less, some are > free. > I think I have seen one that charges more.
MSware is commercial, so I guess anything is possible.
Are you saying that users can download a vista7 upgrade iso for free from microsofts web site, which I would expect if microsoft don't charge anything, as you seem to imply ?
-- This machine running Gnu/Linux Ubuntu 9.10 and posting via Pan. Get your Free copy NOW! http://www.ubuntu.com/
>> I hope it's a fast, secure and flexible OS. Microsoft's victims deserve >> that. I'll probably never use it at home. Just doesn't appeal. I don't >> use Linux because I dislike windows, I just find it more interesting >> apart from anything else.
> I tend to find applications interesting, OSes should be as boring as hell > and as invisible as possible.
Never played with alternate desktops, I take it.
It's not the "OS", for the most part. It is the desktop, the structure, the speed, the very things that make or break the user experience.
But you do have to build this stuff on a solid foundation. That's where the OS matters.
-- Your true value depends entirely on what you are compared with.
> On 2009-11-07, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> (There is one odd issue lately on the Acer... OpenOffice takes a very long >> time to start up. This has been happening only recently. [Fedora update?])
> What version is it? I'm still using 3.1.1 here (gentoo, built and > running on a 7 year old Pentium 2.4G).
Same version.
Odd, it is running better today. 10 seconds for the initial startup, 2 for the next ones. I was having a lot of auto-recovery operation a couple of days ago.
I'm finding that Fedora, like Debian, sometimes has regressions.
The dual-monitor display arrangement Gnome GUI worked fine until my first update, then it would come up, give a mono error, and not rearrange the monitors. I have a little script that runs xrandr directly.
Today, thunar started erroring on missing charset when inserting a USB or CD.
I disabled it, added entries to /etc/fstab, to mount them manually. Fine. But now I discover that Thunar works again after all, it just uses the mount points I added. Strange.
Cue trolls to gibber and caper irrelevantly about how their vendors fix up their Windows machines to work perfectly with Windows.
-- It was all so different before everything changed.
>> Ubuntu 9.10 is causing outrage and frustration, with early adopters >> wishing they'd stuck with previous versions of the Linux distro. >> The best you can say of this situation is that the problems aren't >> universal. Ubuntu and Reg readers together report installing Ubuntu >> 9.10 on >> Acer Aspire A150s, Hewlett Packard 2133, IBM T60, ThinkPad T42, and >> EEE PC netbooks, and laptops either flawlessly or with minor issues.
1. The article didn't quite mention the hardware configuration in which Ubuntu failed to install properly.
2. Notebook computer support has been a weakness of Linux because manufacturers don't offer quality drivers.
-- @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY. / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you! /( _ )\ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.31-14-generic ^ ^ 17:49:01 up 8 days 23:30 1 user load average: 4.05 4.18 4.31 不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA): http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
On 2009-11-08, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> Gregory Shearman pulled this Usenet boner:
> The dual-monitor display arrangement Gnome GUI worked fine until my first > update, then it would come up, give a mono error, and not rearrange the > monitors. I have a little script that runs xrandr directly.
> Today, thunar started erroring on missing charset when inserting a USB or > CD.
Thunar... I've got 1.01 on my lappy desktop. I've stopped using xfce and have gone back to KDE since I upgraded the memory in the laptop. I've still got xfce installed and can start a session if I want, but I'm quite happy with KDE's performance. It's still 3.5.10 though. Gentoo still won't release KDE 4.x as stable.
> I disabled it, added entries to /etc/fstab, to mount them manually. > Fine. But now I discover that Thunar works again after all, it just uses > the mount points I added. Strange.
Dontcha just hate it when things fix themselves without your intervention? It's like a sleeper in your machine, ready to embarrass you in the future at the least convenient moment.
> Cue trolls to gibber and caper irrelevantly about how their vendors fix up > their Windows machines to work perfectly with Windows.
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:51:49 +0800, Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B) wrote:
>>> Ubuntu 9.10 is causing outrage and frustration, with early adopters >>> wishing they'd stuck with previous versions of the Linux distro. >>> The best you can say of this situation is that the problems aren't >>> universal. Ubuntu and Reg readers together report installing Ubuntu >>> 9.10 on >>> Acer Aspire A150s, Hewlett Packard 2133, IBM T60, ThinkPad T42, and >>> EEE PC netbooks, and laptops either flawlessly or with minor issues.
Snip-- > 2. Notebook computer support has been a weakness of Linux because > manufacturers don't offer quality drivers.
That's partially true, but in COLA suspend, hibernate and other laptop functions "just work" and have "worked" for years and people who claim otherwise are making stuff up to harm Linux.
John Fuhrer wrote: > On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:51:49 +0800, Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B) > wrote:
>>>> Ubuntu 9.10 is causing outrage and frustration, with early adopters >>>> wishing they'd stuck with previous versions of the Linux distro. >>>> The best you can say of this situation is that the problems aren't >>>> universal. Ubuntu and Reg readers together report installing Ubuntu >>>> 9.10 on >>>> Acer Aspire A150s, Hewlett Packard 2133, IBM T60, ThinkPad T42, and >>>> EEE PC netbooks, and laptops either flawlessly or with minor issues.
> Snip-- >> 2. Notebook computer support has been a weakness of Linux because >> manufacturers don't offer quality drivers.
> That's partially true, but in COLA suspend, hibernate and other laptop > functions "just work" and have "worked" for years and people who claim > otherwise are making stuff up to harm Linux.
Until recent driver updates I have had difficulties with suspend and hibernate in Windows 7 on my T61 and many from the MS world would say with Windows this feature "just works". I'm still having problems on a Netbook with Windows 7 failing to shut down, another driver issue that will be worked out I'm sure.
I have yet to find an OS and hardware where everything just "always" works but closest so far is Mac and OS X and that is to be expected and likely an unfair comparison to Linux or Windows because of the limited hardware it is designed for.
On 11/08/2009 04:51 AM, Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B) wrote:
>>> Ubuntu 9.10 is causing outrage and frustration, with early adopters >>> wishing they'd stuck with previous versions of the Linux distro. >>> The best you can say of this situation is that the problems aren't >>> universal. Ubuntu and Reg readers together report installing Ubuntu >>> 9.10 on >>> Acer Aspire A150s, Hewlett Packard 2133, IBM T60, ThinkPad T42, and >>> EEE PC netbooks, and laptops either flawlessly or with minor issues.
> 1. The article didn't quite mention the hardware configuration in which > Ubuntu failed to install properly.
> 2. Notebook computer support has been a weakness of Linux because > manufacturers don't offer quality drivers.
Yet I have Karmic NBR freshly installed on an AAO ZG5 with no issues and I'm presently typing away on my Acer 5515 with Fedora 11 which works awesomely. You can get a netbook or notebook to run Linux well.
Even so, Linux isn't for the faint of heart. I know personally from previous hairpulling encounters with wireless and graphics, that you might need to get under the hood and get your hands a little dirty in some instances.
BTW my most recent research indicates that 9.04 handles Poulsbo GMA500 whatever (1366X768) well with minor tweaking, but 9.10 ain't quite there yet. I'll stick with Kubuntu 9.04 on that machine and hope the next LTS handles it out of the box (hint, hint, please!).
>>> I have a copy of Vista on my laptop and I'm entitled to a free (as in US >>> $20 for postage and handling 'free') 'upgrade' to winblows 7. After >>> reading about the process there's no way I'm putting in money or time for >>> an OS I'm only going to use for 20 minutes a month - if that. Hell, even >>> after removing all HP's crapware and switching off as much useless >>> autostart rubbish as I could find, vista /still/ takes twice as long to >>> boot as Karmic.
>> Unlike XP you can upgrade vista to win7. >> The reason you can't do it from XP is because the system registry on XP will >> have been altered by the applications. >> The system registry in vista and win7 is protected from the applications and >> application registry changes are kept separate. >> An upgrade would require knowledge of each change an application has made >> and how to change it. >> It is just about impossible. >> Win7 boots about twice as fast as vista so if your figures are correct it >> will be as fast as karmic. >> CCleaner will remove the cr@pware easily BTW. >> I recommend you don't do it anyway, if you actually use win7 you will know >> how good it actually is.
> I think Microsoft made a huge blunder not offering some kind of upgrade > from XP. > This is going to hurt the initial adoption of Windows 7 by corporations who > don't have the time to scratch load systems, even if it's semi-automated.
> That being said, Windows 7 is incredible. > They really got this one right, unlike Vista IMHO.
> I've moved my DAW machines over to Windows 7 from XP (fresh loads) and with > the exception of one MIDI interface manufacturer who refuses to provide x64 > drivers, all is running great.
> My latency is down around 1.5msec using Ivory, which in itself is > incredible. > Windows 7 looks gorgeous when themed, the GUI is easy to use and the > taskbar based system works great.
> I like how you can drag windows up to the top of the screen to minimize or > maximize them, the previews in the taksbar look sharp and clear and you can > drag windows that are larger than the secondary monitor over to the > secondary monitor and they automatically resize, unlike XP.
> All controls and settings are in one place, control panel. > The search/find function is much more powerful allowing easy network > searches. > and so forth.
> I haven't found anything I don't like yet and it installed perfectly and > with the exception of mPlayer which seems to be having troubles, everything > works. > No surprise there BTW. > I'ts open source so I don't expect it to work without some teeth pulling.
> Booting over to Ubuntu 9.10 is a huge letdown after running Windows 7. > Ubuntu looks flat and lifeless in comparison and runs just about as bad as > can be. > Slow and buggy is the best terms I can come up with. > Oh, it boots real fast though. Much faster than 9.04. > Who cares? > The ugly factor kills it.
> Well I've got Win 7 RC on the other partition of this Fedora machine and after the novelty wore off, I wonder which side won out. Check the headers. The loser hasn't been booted into in a long time.
I still might *purchase* (get 200 bucks yanked from my wallet) Win7, since I *should* keep up with new stuff. But with only the cost of a pack of CD's I could burn a crapload of Linux distros to mess with.
Win7 looked pretty nice in the Release Candidate stage, but loading and maintaining antimalware stuff is a real hassle. That's a showstopper. I *might* buy a copy of Win7, but will probably do most of my stuff in Linux.
Windows Media is OK (due mostly to M$ market dominance and corporate power) and I do like Publisher (one upside of Office).
IE is scary. Word sucks with its stupid and annoying defaults, I hate defrags, AV scans are time consuming, BSoDs suck, SP's suck, Registries suck, patch Tuesdays suck, etc...
>>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:41:36 -0600, DanS wrote:
>>>> Call me a zealot then. Although, I wasn't raving about it.
>>>> This was the first time I went the Kubuntu route directly instead of >>>> installing Ubuntu with GNOME and then adding the KDE desktop.
>>>> It was a clean install and not an upgrade. Enabling the restricted >>>> nVidia drivers was painless and took as expected.
>>> Can't be unless you didn't have to adjust anything, or add dual >>> monitors (twinview) via nvdia-settings.
>> I don't have dual monitors, and it came up at the correct 1400 x 1050 >> resolution, so there was nothing for me to do.
> Then you are fortunate.
So, as a follow up to this........
Last night I purchased the wife a new 22" widescreen monitor, and took her old one. We both had the same model, so I've now got two of the same 20" non-widescreen models.
The hardware setup is two video cards....the onboard video is a gEForce8100 w/256 Megs system RAM....and an 8400GS w/512 Megs of it's own RAM.....each video card is connected to an Acer 2017 20" LCD panel.
After booting up Kubuntu, I used nvidia-settings and tried to activate the second monitor. This all seemed straight forward using the GUI applet.
One thing to note, 'TwinView' was not enabled. My assumption is that 'TwinView' is when using 2 video outputs from the same card. In my case, I had 2 separate cards, so the only choice for the second monitor was using the 'Separate X Display' setting.
I clicked the 'Save to xorg.cong' button, but it errored not being able to write the file.
Starting nvidia via sudo didn't make a difference either.
...then to save it again in the GUI tool, except this time it will ask for a name and location, etc. Doing it that way, it still couldn't write the file, but had a button to 'Preview' it first.
I sudo'd Kate, pasted the text into a new file, and then saved it as /etc/X11/xorg.conf.
I rebooted to find all was fine with the primary display, and the secondary had just a black background, but the mouse would go across to it, but nothing else would.
I then opened, nvidia-settings, checked "Use Xinerama", and then had to manually save a new xorg.conf file again.
Then a reboot, and then dual monitors that work properly.
My conclusion is that the dual-monitor setup was not nearly as difficult as some had made it out to be.
The entire excercise took like 15 minutes.
I was expecting some bizarro issues.......there was none.
In the end, the only problem was some permissions issue writing xorg.conf
On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 11:04:29 -0600, DanS wrote: > John Fuhrer <fuhrer_spam_no_...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1oiif00r1ucay > $.tf145ebmnnvz$....@40tude.net:
>> On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 09:37:56 -0600, DanS wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:41:36 -0600, DanS wrote:
>>>>> Call me a zealot then. Although, I wasn't raving about it.
>>>>> This was the first time I went the Kubuntu route directly instead of >>>>> installing Ubuntu with GNOME and then adding the KDE desktop.
>>>>> It was a clean install and not an upgrade. Enabling the restricted >>>>> nVidia drivers was painless and took as expected.
>>>> Can't be unless you didn't have to adjust anything, or add dual >>>> monitors (twinview) via nvdia-settings.
>>> I don't have dual monitors, and it came up at the correct 1400 x 1050 >>> resolution, so there was nothing for me to do.
>> Then you are fortunate.
> So, as a follow up to this........
> Last night I purchased the wife a new 22" widescreen monitor, and took her > old one. We both had the same model, so I've now got two of the same 20" > non-widescreen models.
> The hardware setup is two video cards....the onboard video is a gEForce8100 > w/256 Megs system RAM....and an 8400GS w/512 Megs of it's own RAM.....each > video card is connected to an Acer 2017 20" LCD panel.
> After booting up Kubuntu, I used nvidia-settings and tried to activate the > second monitor. This all seemed straight forward using the GUI applet.
> One thing to note, 'TwinView' was not enabled. My assumption is that > 'TwinView' is when using 2 video outputs from the same card. In my case, I > had 2 separate cards, so the only choice for the second monitor was using > the 'Separate X Display' setting.
> I clicked the 'Save to xorg.cong' button, but it errored not being able to > write the file.
> Starting nvidia via sudo didn't make a difference either.
> ...then to save it again in the GUI tool, except this time it will ask for > a name and location, etc. Doing it that way, it still couldn't write the > file, but had a button to 'Preview' it first.
> I sudo'd Kate, pasted the text into a new file, and then saved it as > /etc/X11/xorg.conf.
> I rebooted to find all was fine with the primary display, and the secondary > had just a black background, but the mouse would go across to it, but > nothing else would.
> I then opened, nvidia-settings, checked "Use Xinerama", and then had to > manually save a new xorg.conf file again.
> Then a reboot, and then dual monitors that work properly.
> My conclusion is that the dual-monitor setup was not nearly as difficult as > some had made it out to be.
> The entire excercise took like 15 minutes.
> I was expecting some bizarro issues.......there was none.
> In the end, the only problem was some permissions issue writing xorg.conf
And that problem has been around for several versions of Ubuntu. I posted a link to the fix a couple of weeks ago
My point is that Canonical Ubuntu doesn't seem to test what they release.
The first step creates a backup of your currently working xorg.conf file. Step 2 runs the NVIDIA utility to generate a new xorg.conf file that the utility can actually read. Step 3 runs the graphical NVIDIA setup tool as root, so you can actually save your changes.
If this does not work then after step 1, do sudo rm /etc/X11/xorg.conf to delete your current xorg.conf file. Then run sudo nvidia-xconfig and sudo nvidia-settings.
Thanks to the author.
Finally, add the below to file /etc/X11/xorg.conf to get back missing border (You may have to be root in order to do this, if you have permissions issue as current user).
To the Screen section, add back
Option "AddARGBGLXVisuals" "true" After saving the file, either restart gdm process or reboot the system for the changes to take effect.
|
