Windows Linux or Mac? by Haze

Quote:
Originally posted by Tiger:

Really? Am I so unusual? I regularly leave my pc running for a week or more while downlo - er, watching legal DVDs.

And while it's true Windows is easy to install/setup, I can't remember ever having to do any kind of 'maintennace' to keep it running. Any problems I've ever had were usually caused by crappy hardware or software, as far as I can tell.

Well, that's just my experience.

I have read on a comment to a torr... web forum posting, that someone has an average uptime of about a month with a modern windows machine.

Still a far cry for my 210+ days without so much as a hiccup (*knocks on wood* as I know Murphy is listening

).

That being said, if you don't know the limits of the uptime on your computer because you shut it off before it reaches it, having a machine capable of a longer uptime is rather moot. Basically, if your box is capable of staying up as long as you need it to be, then super

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 6:34 AM

RETROVERTIGO

Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Pfft, stealing from a thief doesn't really count. (If you're referring to PARC here)

Looks like someone at Vista had their eyes on Looking Glass, to me. Perhaps it's just my imagination.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

Ya think?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by retrovertigo:
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Pfft, stealing from a thief doesn't really count. (If you're referring to PARC here)

Looks like someone at Vista had their eyes on Looking Glass, to me. Perhaps it's just my imagination.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

Ya think?

I didn't realize a lot of folks knew about Looking Glass! Used to be Sun's little pony. Partly the reason I started trying out Solaris, was to see what this company could do.

Quote:
Originally posted by Tiger:
Really? Am I so unusual? I regularly leave my pc running for a week or more while downlo - er, watching legal DVDs.

And while it's true Windows is easy to install/setup, I can't remember ever having to do any kind of 'maintennace' to keep it running. Any problems I've ever had were usually caused by crappy hardware or software, as far as I can tell.

Nope, you're not so unusual. That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 9:48 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:

That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users.

How presumptuous of you to say.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 9:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:

That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users.

How presumptuous of you to say.

Yep. I don't really stand for the crap that folks who barely use the OS say about it. There's plenty of legitimate reasons for hating WinXP; pick a real one, and not a grandios exaggeration.

If you're using it for home or office use, and not installing all kinds of crap, you're not going to have problems like the "M$ bashers" claim you'll have. Of course, they're the ones to gain by MS losing its OS majority, so why do you think they're saying this kind of stuff?

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 10:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:

and not a grandios exaggeration.

You said, "That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users." and you're charging me with a "grandios exaggreation"?

Basically, where's your support? Or do you know all the XP users so you can make this claim?

Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:

If you're using it for home or office use, and not installing all kinds of crap, you're not going to have problems like the "M$ bashers" claim you'll have. Of course, they're the ones to gain by MS losing its OS majority, so why do you think they're saying this kind of stuff?

I reference /. with a lot of references to benchmarks, etc that show such things that you don't seem to want to admit to.

Sorry man, but the actual independent studies show differently. Especially when it comes to servers.

You also seem to be assuming that the non-profits that comprise the majority of Linux/*BSD community will actually gain something.

Here's the point, it is a free OS. So, what are people actually going to gain in the end if M$ loses its majority? Certainly not money. So, what then?

But, if not the OS itself, what about the software that runs on it? Again, mostly free and opensource. So what do they gain? Again, certainly not money.

You're claim lacks even motivation.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 10:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:

and not a grandios exaggeration.

You said, "That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users." and you're charging me with a "grandios exaggreation"?

Basically, where's your support? Or do you know all the XP users so you can make this claim?

I believe I charged you with general jackassery in a previous post, and it still holds. For instance, you just made a windows XP user feel like a freak of nature above because he didn't have the damning problems you claimed you had when you used it.

I think it's much more on your head to prove that WinXP really does crash on everyone at the fault of Microsoft, then my claim that it doesn't unless you install something stupid. Big suprise. Oh, I read your post saying it was "just your experience", but we all know what you're getting at.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:

If you're using it for home or office use, and not installing all kinds of crap, you're not going to have problems like the "M$ bashers" claim you'll have. Of course, they're the ones to gain by MS losing its OS majority, so why do you think they're saying this kind of stuff?

I reference /. with a lot of references to benchmarks, etc that show such things that you don't seem to want to admit to.

Sorry man, but the actual independent studies show differently. Especially when it comes to servers.

You also seem to be assuming that the non-profits that comprise the majority of Linux/*BSD community will actually gain something.

Here's the point, it is a free OS. So, what are people actually going to gain in the end if M$ loses its majority? Certainly not money. So, what then?

But, if not the OS itself, what about the software that runs on it? Again, mostly free and opensource. So what do they gain? Again, certainly not money.

You're claim lacks even motivation.

The gain? You're actually asking me what kind of gain there is?

Hmm. Lets see. Build an OS, and they will come. But, if they're all tied up on Microsoft's ball field, they're not going to come.

And how about driver support?
And how about software support?
etc. etc.

Or, did you feel like pretending I only meant financial gain just to try to make me look like an ignorant ass?

Yep, I figured. By the way, if you have to have a disclaimer above your post such as,

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[k, I don't have the time to proof this post, so the disclaimer is that if you read an aggressive tone or some such, it is not intended. It's just because I'm currently in a hurry and didn't have time to check and modify.

then you probably need to look into what the heck you're posting.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 11:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:

I believe I charged you with general jackassery in a previous post, and it still holds. For instance, you just made a windows XP user feel like a freak of nature above because he didn't have the damning problems you claimed you had when you used it.

I think it's much more on your head to prove that WinXP really does crash on everyone at the fault of Microsoft, then my claim that it doesn't unless you install something stupid. Big suprise. Oh, I read your post saying it was "just your experience", but we all know what you're getting at.

I have stated that in my (and everyone I know) experience(s), windows behaves extremely poorly. I have even pointed to a site there there are a lot of references that support my claims. Or didn't you read that far in my posts?

You, well you've failed to do that in any way shape or form.

Also, where do you get the audacity to describe the feelings of Tiger? (S)he only mentioned that (s)he didn't experience the problems that I described. There was nothing in his/her post that even remotely implies that (s)he felt like "a freak of nature."

If you have a problem with me, fine. But, don't distorte reality so that you can use others as pawns in your vendetta against me.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

And how about driver support?
And how about software support?
etc. etc.

The free OS's already have good driver support. And this, almost all through reverse engineering and sharing of code.

They already have enough free opensource software to be alternatives to windows. What software do people really need that isn't availible? For general use, nothing.

So, your point here, no dice.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

Or, did you feel like pretending I only meant financial gain just to try to make me look like an ignorant ass?

Yep, I figured.

You again put words and my mouth and make baseless assumptions.

My point was that since there is more than enough high quality free software for Linux/*BSD, driver support, etc that this cannot be a motivator. Especially since the GNU foundation is completely against closed source things.

If you don't believe me, lookup the various ports trees, rpm/deb/etc archives, and supported hardware lists for the various OSS OS projects.

Please note that close souce things is pretty much the only thing that a corp would make. Please note that if a corp did make something for Linux/*BSD in this fashion, that you'd be certain in short order, to see an opensource project started. And if it had any real need in the community, this project would flurish. If not, it wouldn't. But, then again, the commercial product would then pretty much die as well.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

By the way, if you have to have a disclaimer above your post such as,

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

[k, I don't have the time to proof this post, so the disclaimer is that if you read an aggressive tone or some such, it is not intended. It's just because I'm currently in a hurry and didn't have time to check and modify.

then you probably need to look into what the heck you're posting.

Perhaps. But, if you would have read the disclaimer itself, then you'd realize the reason for doing it. And referencing all my previous posts, here and else where, this is hardly a common occurence.

I'll also point out that you are the only one that seems to have a problem with it. And if the person that I was replying to didn't have a problem with it, why are you trying to make it an issue?

Basically, I find you a petty, small, narrow minded person that can't let go of being proven wrong on so many accounts. You also don't seem capable of letting go of any offense that I might have given you in this thread even when I apologized for it.

I hoped that you would be grown enough to put this behind you. But, you clearly aren't.

In all seriousness, I pitty you and only hope that one day, you are able to grow up enough to become a big enough person, to be able to communicate with adults in an adult way.

Now, I'll leave you with whatever you see fit as "the last word." I can only assume, because of your posting history, that it'll be a continuation of this temper tantrum. Please surprise me.

Don't expect a reply from me here or elsewhere from this point forward. I have no inclination to waste my keystrokes on you until you have shown a decent level of maturity.

And now, we are ended.

Good-day.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 11:51 AM

In other news:

I've installed Ubuntu on my Laptop and I'm very impressed, the installation was easier than Windows XP, setting up the wireless and wired networks was a breeze (no drivers even, put XP to shame) even interfacing with my windows network was easier than getting my Windows machines to do it (seriously...).

However...

ATI graphics drivers for my Mobillity 9600 won't even install, I've downloaded them, tried it myself, followed the readmes, the release notes, the community everything but no dice. It complains that the dependencies aren't there, in Windows I'd fix that in seconds, but I'm not so hot on Linux, anyone got any ideas?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 12:11 PM

Rather than read over your paragraphs of drivel, I'll just answer a few key points. You really go on and on, and I really don't care enough to read multiple paragraphs of your writing.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
You, well you've failed to do that in any way shape or form.

Regarding the arguments I've made, I've linked to several articles relating to security concerns. You've linked to what... slashdot?

{snip} (I'm not even going to touch that "vendetta" and "pawns" crap)

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
The free OS's already have good driver support. And this, almost all through reverse engineering and sharing of code.

They already have enough free opensource software to be alternatives to windows. What software do people really need that isn't availible? For general use, nothing.

So, your point here, no dice.

My god! Have you ever tried to run a very demanding game and attempted to squeeze every last FPS you can out of your video card? Good lord, 3rd party drivers only go so far. I'm amazed you could say that with a straight face!

And you realize that gaming applications are.. software, correct? If I wanted to play the new game, Oblivion, on my linux machine, I'd be fairly out of luck wouldn't I? Yet, without a MS dominance, Bethesda would've likely made it for another platform; perhaps a *nix one. Meaning, you folks would benefit.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

You again put words and my mouth and make baseless assumptions.

My point was that since there is more than enough high quality free software for Linux/*BSD, driver support, etc that this cannot be a motivator. Especially since the GNU foundation is completely against closed source things.

{snip}

You hide your attacks poorly, then feign innocence when I call you out. I doubt anyone buys that crap; and it's insulting that you think I'm stupid enough not to notice.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

Perhaps. But, if you would have read the disclaimer itself, then you'd realize the reason for doing it. And referencing all my previous posts, here and else where, this is hardly a common occurence.

I'll also point out that you are the only one that seems to have a problem with it. And if the person that I was replying to didn't have a problem with it, why are you trying to make it an issue?

I'm merely pointing out that you yourself admitted to the possibility of your coming across as a jackass, as you put it (albeit less bluntly) in your own post.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Basically, I find you a petty, small, narrow minded person that can't let go of being proven wrong on so many accounts. You also don't seem capable of letting go of any offense that I might have given you in this thread even when I apologized for it.
{snip}(Must you have several paragraphs just for attacking my person? One suffices, and gets the point across quite nicely.)

Apologized? Where might that be? Perhaps, you mean this:

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
On behalf of Canada, I apologize for Sneaker98's behaviour (and any part that I had in this). I don't know what happened to him/her to become the aggressive, bitter, unforgiving person (s)he is, but I apologize.

Well, you'll have to excuse me if that doesn't exactly make me cheery, and eager to move on with our friendly relationship?

Remember that high road we were discussing?

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Now, I'll leave you with whatever you see fit as "the last word." I can only assume, because of your posting history, that it'll be a continuation of this temper tantrum. Please surprise me.

Yep, I get it, you think I'm a child, yadda yadda. Leave it at a few sentences next time, why bore others needlessly? Unfortunately, your prior history of promising to not respond hasn't gone over well.

However, it's quite amazing: you actually accuse me of a temper tantrum after what; three or four paragraphs of attacks on my character, person, and heck; even age?

Remember that high road we were discussing? Yep, too late for it. Remember, an insult is an insult, wether it consists mainly of words over three syllables, or not.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:45 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Rather than read over your paragraphs of drivel, I'll just answer a few key points. You really go on and on, and I really don't care enough to read multiple paragraphs of your writing.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
You, well you've failed to do that in any way shape or form.

Regarding the arguments I've made, I've linked to several articles relating to security concerns. You've linked to what... slashdot?

{snip} (I'm not even going to touch that "vendetta" and "pawns" crap)

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
The free OS's already have good driver support. And this, almost all through reverse engineering and sharing of code.

They already have enough free opensource software to be alternatives to windows. What software do people really need that isn't availible? For general use, nothing.

So, your point here, no dice.

My god! Have you ever tried to run a very demanding game and attempted to squeeze every last FPS you can out of your video card? Good lord, 3rd party drivers only go so far. I'm amazed you could say that with a straight face!

And you realize that gaming applications are.. software, correct? If I wanted to play the new game, Oblivion, on my linux machine, I'd be fairly out of luck wouldn't I? Yet, without a MS dominance, Bethesda would've likely made it for another platform; perhaps a *nix one. Meaning, you folks would benefit.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

You again put words and my mouth and make baseless assumptions.

My point was that since there is more than enough high quality free software for Linux/*BSD, driver support, etc that this cannot be a motivator. Especially since the GNU foundation is completely against closed source things.

{snip}

You hide your attacks poorly, then feign innocence when I call you out. I doubt anyone buys that crap; and it's insulting that you think I'm stupid enough not to notice.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

Perhaps. But, if you would have read the disclaimer itself, then you'd realize the reason for doing it. And referencing all my previous posts, here and else where, this is hardly a common occurence.

I'll also point out that you are the only one that seems to have a problem with it. And if the person that I was replying to didn't have a problem with it, why are you trying to make it an issue?

I'm merely pointing out that you yourself admitted to the possibility of your coming across as a jackass, as you put it (albeit less bluntly) in your own post.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Basically, I find you a petty, small, narrow minded person that can't let go of being proven wrong on so many accounts. You also don't seem capable of letting go of any offense that I might have given you in this thread even when I apologized for it.
{snip}(Must you have several paragraphs just for attacking my person? One suffices, and gets the point across quite nicely.)

Apologized? Where might that be? Perhaps, you mean this:
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
On behalf of Canada, I apologize for Sneaker98's behaviour (and any part that I had in this). I don't know what happened to him/her to become the aggressive, bitter, unforgiving person (s)he is, but I apologize.

Well, you'll have to excuse me if that doesn't exactly make me cheery, and eager to move on with our friendly relationship?

Remember that high road we were discussing?

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Now, I'll leave you with whatever you see fit as "the last word." I can only assume, because of your posting history, that it'll be a continuation of this temper tantrum. Please surprise me.

Yep, I get it, you think I'm a child, yadda yadda. Leave it at a few sentences next time, why bore others needlessly? Unfortunately, your prior history of promising to not respond hasn't gone over well.

However, it's quite amazing: you actually accuse me of a temper tantrum after what; three or four paragraphs of attacks on my character, person, and heck; even age?

Remember that high road we were discussing? Yep, too late for it. Remember, an insult is an insult, wether it consists mainly of words over three syllables, or not.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 3:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:

In other news:

I've installed Ubuntu on my Laptop and I'm very impressed, the installation was easier than Windows XP, setting up the wireless and wired networks was a breeze (no drivers even, put XP to shame) even interfacing with my windows network was easier than getting my Windows machines to do it (seriously...).

Awesome

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:

ATI graphics drivers for my Mobillity 9600 won't even install, I've downloaded them, tried it myself, followed the readmes, the release notes, the community everything but no dice. It complains that the dependencies aren't there, in Windows I'd fix that in seconds, but I'm not so hot on Linux, anyone got any ideas?

It's been awhile since I've gotten into detail with Linux. STDOUBT seems to be quite knowledgeable, so I'll defer to him. But, since his involvment here seems to be intermittent, I'd recommend contacting him directly.

Hope everything works out for you

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:

However...

ATI graphics drivers for my Mobillity 9600 won't even install, I've downloaded them, tried it myself, followed the readmes, the release notes, the community everything but no dice. It complains that the dependencies aren't there, in Windows I'd fix that in seconds, but I'm not so hot on Linux, anyone got any ideas?

Hey there Citizen.
Firstly, nvidia does do a bit better job with drivers for Linux. That's just for future reference. Now to your laptop:
By default Ubuntu steers you toward pure open source packages for installable software. You have a file called sources.list found here: /etc/apt/sources.list. I contains addresses from which your system can grab new software. By default, these addresses point to open source stuff only. The ATI 3D drivers are closed source.
Sounds like you need to either add to or edit that file. I'm assuming you downloaded drivers from ATI? Well, the best way is to download through apt-get which is your systems default package manager. Assuming also you're after 3D acceleration here right? You need to make apt point to "restricted" and "multiverse" software repositories. After making changes to sources.list, run "apt-get update". When that finishes, run "apt-cache search ati". I'm sure it's just a matter of adding the right repository and then updating "apt". Tip: always use the "-s" switch before you "apt-get install", i.e., "apt-get -s install" as this will "simulate" the install and reveal any incompletions or problems before a go-ahead.
Tip(2): at the console run "lspci" -the true name of your ATI chip will be listed there which you can also use to troubleshoot or ask about on the ubuntu forums (really good user forums).
Keep in mind it's not the model name/number of your graphics chip that needs the support-it's the actual chip model (find with lspci).
Good Luck, and do feel free to message me with a ton more detail than your post provided ;]
EDIT: Forgot to mention dependencies. Apt resolves all that automatically. So if you simply d/l'd from ATI's site, chances are you will be missing something like a compatibility layer or some cryptic glx widget.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 27, 2006 12:15 AM

It's just general stuff, I'm working on a website that uses alpha blending which is notably slow when scrolling etc which it wasn't doing under Windows because Windows had the graphics card drivers...

I've downloaded from ATI and through apt though didn't know about the -s switch and I followed something from the Forums which didn't include the cache search. When I run aticonfig which is the last step it complains that a fglx<...>.so file can't be found.

I've played with apt and I think it's pointing to the restricted and multiverse repositories.

I'll give your method a try (if I can, the likely hood of me having an internet connection for the next three days isn't high) and get back to you as and when.

Thing is I've got so far with the ATI install, it's got the Control Panel in and all that old junk, but none of it works. I've had a play and become a bit more competant (Linuxing at a 2nd Grade level, out of Primary school now...) so now that I've managed to install about three versions of the same driver, none of which work, it might be easier to reinstall Ubuntu and do it properly...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 27, 2006 11:25 AM

EVERYWORLDSPINNIN

Quote:
general jackassery

That's gonna be my new gaming handle.

I can't stop laughing.

--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 27, 2006 4:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by everyworldspinnin:
Quote:
general jackassery

That's gonna be my new gaming handle.
I can't stop laughing.

It's one of my favs ;)

STdoubt is definately correct, nvidia is far better about linux drivers than ATI. Does the folks who make the Omega drivers for ATI do them for linux as well?

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 27, 2006 7:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
It's just general stuff, I'm working on a website that uses alpha blending which is notably slow when scrolling etc which it wasn't doing under Windows because Windows had the graphics card drivers...

Well, bit of a different animal there -unrelated
to lack of 3d accelerated driver. Has probably to
do with the boot-time use of the framebuffer and a bug with the ATI stuff (hint: change vga=0x317 to vga=normal in /boot/grub/menu.lst then reboot might help, can't hurt).

Quote:

I've downloaded from ATI and through apt though didn't know about the -s switch and I followed something from the Forums which didn't include the cache search. When I run aticonfig which is the last step it complains that a fglx<...>.so file can't be found.

You may need to install "xorg-driver-fglrx".
I do nvidia myself, but I think I can help
you -but we should take it off-thread methinks.
Quote:

I've played with apt and I think it's pointing to the restricted and multiverse repositories.

Knowin' is better'n thinkin' ;]
If the line does not have an '#', then it
is considered "uncommented". Only uncommented
lines are picked up by the prog. After any change
to sources.list run the 'apt-get update' always.

Quote:

I'll give your method a try (if I can, the likely hood of me having an internet connection for the next three days isn't high) and get back to you as and when.

Thing is I've got so far with the ATI install, it's got the Control Panel in and all that old junk, but none of it works. I've had a play and become a bit more competant (Linuxing at a 2nd Grade level, out of Primary school now...) so now that I've managed to install about three versions of the same driver, none of which work, it might be easier to reinstall Ubuntu and do it properly...

Well, ironically, that's the rub. There's really
no need to reinstall to get anything right. Just
a matter of giving the system what it wants. Which
is likely nothing more than the fglrx driver and
a few simple edits to some configuration files.
Feel free to reinstall though -I used to even think it was fun ;] If you do decide to reinstall
for the sheer joy, do give "Serenity" a try first:
http://www.elivecd.org/gb/Download/0.4.2/
Here's a snippet from the changelog for version 0.4.2:
" * All the Bugs listed on the 'Bugs Section' are fixed thanks to the bugs reports of the users on the IRC channel
* ATI works again with the fglrx driver.
* We have now some support for SATA hard disks included on the installer.
* We have also a new feature on Elpanel to configure your terminal.
* Firefox 1.5.
* We have also a better support on the autolauncher for Windows' Type CDs and autodetection for cedega, if you install the games.
* A lot of minor changes not listed, to make Elive better and better."
elive is much less a newbie distro, but it gets
my seal of approval for pimpin' to the masses since it's dead-compatible with vanilla Debian repositories, unlike Ubuntu. Plus it just kicks so much arse (<--that's for all you Brits here ;) The 1 problem with elive is no auto-config for wireless. All has to be "hand installed" with apt. That will change with 0.5 or later (yes it's the sexiest beta you'll ever see).
Citizen -I'd be more than happy to help you get your laptop in top form off-thread since I'd need to see a bunch of command output and file snips from your system. I'll message you my addy -you can take it from there.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:17 AM

RETROVERTIGO

I love me some wi-fi! Sittin' in Millenium Park right now enjoying 60 degree weather, and thought I'd show you all how kickass Macs can be. I took a couple pictures with my camera phone, transferred them to my computer using the bluetooth connection icon right in Mac OS's menu bar, then uploaded them to my webspace:

(there were a couple more steps, but you get the idea)

... and here they are!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:58 AM

Ahh back to civilisation...

STDOUBT:
I'll send you a mail in a bit thanks.
Couple of things though.

It could be the driver, as the graphics card would also accelerate 2D operations like Alpha Blending. Using generic drivers the Graphics card will be running no acceleration, in Windows moving a window about can be slow when you haven't got your accelerator drivers installed.

Drivers:
NVidia software has always been better, no matter what platform, however once you've got the Software sorted the ATI Hardware (IMHO) is much better and often cheaper...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:42 AM

Because this thread is still active I decided to post a bit of info concerning Windows XP and Linux that have recently come to my attention.

XP... I decided to see what the "Power Toys" could do for me. Messed with logon defaults, wanting to keep it simple. Then, I started having a problem logging onto my own computer. There is only one user, no one else touches it, and I wanted to be able to simply push the button and turn it on. (The entire system goes OFF at the end of the day, always, for personal reasons.) The problem was that no matter what I did, I ended up having to either push a button to get in, or in the other startup mode, hit Ctl-Alt-Del twice to get to push yet another button to start things up.

Went to Microsoft website, where I found close to 2,000 links to this specific problem. Happily I was able to find the right one reasonably quickly, and fixed the problem through editing the registry, something one doesn't do happily or lightly.

---------------------

Disgusted, I again went looking for Linux aps, only to rediscover Linux never deals with either *.mpg or *.mp3 files, both of which I NEED. Accordingly, I'm stuck with XP. Because of the way I work, I can't mess with dual boot.

The only good thing is that Windows XP and M/S did in fact deal with the problem. The bad part is that M/S created the problem themselves.

So life goes on with XP....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:

Disgusted, I again went looking for Linux aps, only to rediscover Linux never deals with either *.mpg or *.mp3 files, both of which I NEED. Accordingly, I'm stuck with XP. Because of the way I work, I can't mess with dual boot.

What do you mean by, "Linux never deals with either *mpg or *.mp3"?

Do you mean, audio/video editors?

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 31, 2006 2:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Linux never deals with either *.mpg or *.mp3 files, both of which I NEED.

I wish I knew where all this misinformation is
coming from...
Try installing "w32codecs". I know it's not very
straight forward, and it is confusing for new users
but Linux can playback virtually ANY media
file. It's true that most 'big' distros don't
ship w32codecs in the default install since most
of these codecs are proprietary. But they are
available.
But Ruxton, I'd really like to know how you got
that idea into your noggin'.
P.S.I suddenly have a hankering to rip another CD to my hard drive as automatically title-tagged mp3s!!
P.P.S. Elive comes pre-loaded with DVD codecs
and the w32codecs (that naughty Thanny) which
means that if you install it, you can playback
DVDs and virtually any audio/video file out of the box!
http://www.elivecd.org/gb/Download/0.4.2/
Plus it's code-named Serenity
Sigma! Stop me before I pimp again!!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 31, 2006 10:44 AM

SigmaNunki, "...audio or video editors?"
Yes. I need GoldWave, which doesn't run on Linux. Also, from my brief reading, Fedora Core 5 still has problems with Dell's sound cards.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 31, 2006 11:02 AM

STDOUBT,
Here's the thing. I looked at one of the Linux websites and read that Linux cannot deal with MP3 or mpg files because of copyright laws. While it may be true that I can in fact get MP3 files to run, and mpgs, under Linux, I simply don't have time to dig into the Internet and find all the solutions. And I have to do it all myself because of my location.

I find that my favorite CD burner, Burnquick, cannot work under Linux. Just yesterday I tried for over an hour to copy a CD with Windows XP's built-in software. It would not do what I wanted, which was to read from one CD drive and write to another. So I installed Burnquick and did the job, including installation, in less than a minute.

It's largely a time thing. If I spend all the necessary time to get the computer to do everything I want, the cost in time would be in the thousands of dollars. I can't afford that, so make do with the Microsoft stuff…at least until I get pissed off at it again!

Thank you for your time and information.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 5, 2006 10:22 PM

Took the advice of the masters on this thread and installed dual-boot Ubuntu. As expected, it can't find the damned sound card on my Dell GX1 P3 500 mhz. But the program looks good. Will spend a bit of time fiddling with it, next few weeks.

WHY did I do this, after my last post? Got so pissed with Windows screwing up stuff I carefully set up, and with it not permitting me to do what I want to do that I went back to this thread, read a bunch of it, and popped for Ubuntu. LOOOONggg download. Created boot disk. It all worked, but for the sound card. Why can't they fix this simple thing? More time to dig into it, or else just zero sound on Linux.

Immense thanks to Citizen and STDoubt.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 2:57 AM

Try some of these links:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingSoundProblems

http://www.archivesat.com/Edubuntu_developer_discussion/thread278571.h
tm
https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+ticket/491

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 3:11 AM

MRBEN

I've been a long time Linux user, with Linux being the only OS on my main machine for the last few years. I've used Debian mostly, but have recently moved onto Ubuntu.

With regards to getting your soundcard working - log a bug report if it is a genuine compatibility issue; they are always looking to improve the hardware support, but don't know unless someone tells them.

mrben

"Carpe Aptenodytes"
http://www.jedimoose.org

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 7:44 AM

HAZE

My Ubuntu DVD arrived last week. Great except for the fact I cant get the live CD boot up! Very annoying.

--------------------------------------------------
Who do you suppose is in there?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 1:25 PM

Citizen, many thanks, but now another problem has surfaced, which has taken up my whole afternoon, about four hours now, to no avail. The dual-boot window, "grub," is GONE. And nothing I have done has brought it back, including some very inventive cussing.

I simply put Ubuntu on my D:\ drive, which is a separate hard disk of 80 gig size. Windows XP Home resides on C:\, a small six-gig drive. No matter what I do including trying the "rescue" mode of Ubuntu allows me to reinstall grub. I let Ubuntu set the partitions, which it ought to have done well, including setting the grub screen onto C for selection at boot.

Don't expect any help, but can't afford six more hours to try to access the Linux stuff. This worthless shit pisses me off like you can't believe. All I see on link after link are commands to type, none of which the computer is able to see. Now one suggests downloading a 125-MB fixit disk to solve the problems that NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Thanks for letting me rant.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 1:42 PM

That's weird. Though I'm surprised spreading boot systems over two disks even worked. Where is GRUB resident? I assume it's on the same disk as Ubuntu? I'm surprised this worked, since the system can only handle one bootable volume, i.e. you should have all your OS on the same disk, with your bootstrap taking up the first 512bytes of that disk.

It's fine to have seperate partitions, but seperate physical drives shouldn't work.

I sounds like you can boot to Ubuntu, yes? if Grub and Ubuntu are on the same drive that makes sense, because the system wouldn't recognise the Windows drive as a bootable volume. Try taking the power lead of your second drive and seeing if Windows boots.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 2:15 PM

It's the other way around. I can get only Windows XP to run. Some time back I saw a long description that had XP on the C:\ drive, and some distro of Linux on the D:\ drive, which was a second physical hard drive. The guy madethe comment that this was the easiest way to set up dual boot. But I can't find that link again.

I think grub was originally put onto the C drive by Ubuntu. I saw the grub screen once last night (late). Today I put on GAG because it looked nice. But then I never saw the grub screen again, and neither GAG nor "Ubuntu rescue" (boot from CD) give me any options to run Ubuntu. Windows says the c drive is now Disk 1 and is "healthy", as is disk 2 which used to be the D drive. I now have no D drive listed (but do have CD and DVD drives listed as E and F).

Windows will not allow me to rename the D drive to D. So there's no D drive at all. Doesn't show up on My Computer, but does in Disk Management.

NOthing I've found on Ubuntu discussions works to address this.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 2:24 PM

Right. Maybe I'm behind the times, I really thought you could only have one boot volume. Anyway it sounds like there's something up with your second drive if windows can't mount it.

Since Grub and Ubuntu have disappeared I'd hazard a guess that your D drive was set up as the primary boot volume, and grub was on that. Try looking at your BIOS, specifically which drive is set up as the boot device? Can the BIOS see your second drive? (if windows can see it i'd say the BIOS should).

Try disconnecting the windows drive. If you can boot up into Ubuntu you know that the drives okay, otherwise theres a problem with your D: drive.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 2:27 PM

Oh! hang on GAG (Graphical Boot Manager, in Spanish)? I bet that GAG has screwed up the boot sector on D: so that D: is no longer bootable. Since Grub was acting as the bootstrap for Ubuntu that would stop it from working.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 2:28 PM

Forgot to mention, XP is on FAT 32.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 2:43 PM

Suspected it (GAG) too. Any idea how to get grub back? Was about to stick in the Windows XP disk and try to fix the MBR, but I doubt it's the problem since XP works just fine.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 3:08 PM

No, your XP is fine, as is it's bootstrap (the MBR is windows speak for the bootsector, or the first 512bytes of the disk) the problem is with Grub which was your master boot record which is now corrupted.

Unless someone with more Linux experience wants to weigh in (STDoubt?) I'd say the easiest option would be to reinstall Ubuntu and Grub as before.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 3:27 PM

M'usuri sana, bwana.

Suspected as much. However, will mess with BIOS to see if I can default to Ubuntu before dicking away another couple hours.

All best,

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 8:10 PM

Up and running with Ubuntu, and for those who care, I didn't have to reinstall it. Diddled with the rescue bit of the installation CD, and finally tried typing "su" at the first prompt, WHICH NO GODDAMNED DOLT RUNNING UBUNTU EVER MENTIONED WAS NECESSARY, got to the ROOT and was able to reinstall GRUB. Far, far worse than the shitty writing for Microsoft are the piss-poor suggestions of EVERYONE (except for those on this particular thread) who suggests ANYTHING for Linux, which really doesn't help the folks like me who really don't have a clue how to get stuff to work. What is needed, desperately, is an EDITOR to clear up some of the instructions for installing and troubleshooting ALL these Linux installations. I searched the forums, and poor installer after poor installer had to ask the SAME questions concerning dual-boot, only to have nerd after nerd answer the questions with the most vague and high-tech answers possible. Such piss-poor efforts really gall a professional editor such as myself.

What a cluster-f*&^!! My heart goes out to those who want to try these systems but can't decipher the lousy "help" that is all over the internet. Only one source, a fellow who took immense pains to explain partitions and how the various operating systems use them, was above reproach. He had the clues and clear-cut information that finally led me to the solution. And mind you, I've only got Ubuntu to work again. Haven't yet seen the double-boot GRUB screen, and may have to spend another day dicking with this stuff until I can finally look at both XP and Ubuntu.

All for now. One day shot in the ass.... But I did learn something, I guess.

Kindest thanks to you, Citizen, for pointing me in several right directions. As I grow older I appreciate how much time can mean, one day at a time, and I'm deeply indebted to you for your generous assistance.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 10:41 PM

Heya fellers-
Sorry I missed so many posts here.
Ruxton, you stop learning you will get old.
;-)
WRT your problem dual-booting, if you're seeing the
GRUB boot prompt, but no listing for XP, try this:
add the following to the end of your
/boot/grub/menu.lst file:

Quote:

title Microsoft Windows XP Professional
root (hd0,0)
savedefault
makeactive
chainloader +1

Save the file then run:
$ sudo update-grub (sudo is the way to get root on Ubuntu -via user password).
If grub comes back without an error then I'll
bet you a fruity oaty bar you'll now see
the XP option when you reboot (unless somehow the
windows install got Borked).
And now an FYI: The best place for GRUB to be
installed is hda1; that is, on the 1st partition
of your primary/master hard drive.
Ruxton, about your D:\ drive; Windows can't see
Linux partitions. Linux can see Windows partitions, but can have problems writing to NTFS.
That your XP is running on fat32 is nice since from ubuntu you'll be able to see and use the C:\ drive.(Edit: "c:\" = hda ;generally, hda1 since XP will make 1 partition on the primary master by default -yes it thinks it's THAT important ;-))

One thing that can throw you off is that GRUB has
its own convention for naming hard drives and
partitions. (hd0,0) = hda1. (hd0,1) = hda2.
(hd1,0) = hdb1 etc.

I'll be glad to help you in more detail if you want.
EDIT: P.S. you wanna stick with GRUB.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 6, 2006 11:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Haze:
My Ubuntu DVD arrived last week. Great except for the fact I cant get the live CD boot up! Very annoying.

If you've told the BIOS to boot from CDROM, and the
disk won't boot, sounds like a bad disk. Either
that or you're trying to boot a DVD in a CD drive..
That could stop the show too ;]

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:24 PM

STDOUBT,

Warmest thanks to you for your kind help (and insight into aging!).

Howsomever... I found Ubuntu was horridly slow, far slower than my XP setup. Accordingly, I have set aside my hard-won Ubuntu disk, all the documentation including your edit notes, and wiped the entire computer clean. I had a mess with multiple XP installs that ended up taking up 50-percent more of the HD than it should have, no idea why, but now I have an absolutely clean install of XP.

I suspect I'll need a faster computer in the foreseeable, and will be sure to use Linux as a dual boot on it.

I was about to install only Ubuntu to see if the problem was installing it on a huge disk (80 gig) by itself. May have been its own failure to set up a swap file, but suspect it was just my 500-hz P3 Dell that was the slowup.

Yet Windows XP seems to run very quickly....

All in all it was an inteesting experience. As you noted, once I figured out how to install GRUB I put it on the main (c:\, or hda1) drive, not on hdb1. But as I noted earlier, I just don't have time to mess with it now, as I needed a computer professionally right away.

Thanks again.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:42 PM