• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Using Windows XP, want better

npc4

Member
Here goes -- So far, Windows XP has been rather good to me. I've almost never had any total system crashes or freezes that weren't a result of me installing bad device drivers. I could say some other good things but the reason I'm here is because I think I would want an OS that is better. Using a Mac OS is out of the question since I don't have a Mac, so I've been thinking about Linux, seeing as it's my only real alternative. I'm downloading Knoppix right now just to see what it is like. I've used things like UNIX shells and DOS, back in the day, so learning the command prompt isn't a problem. Learning a new OS, even though it will probably take a while, isn't a problem as long as it's good. However, I'd like to use a GUI the majority of the time, more or less of a replacement for Windows, if possible.

What I'm concerned about though, will it be useful? It may be cool and spiffy to have a Linux machine, but if it doesn't run the programs I want, or I have to constantly switch between Linux and XP to do what I need to, I might as well not bother.

Here's some questions (let me know if I should put this in the FAQ thread or something):

1. Linux is touted to be extremely stable, right? What would make it less likely to crash compared to XP? (like I said, XP has proven to be pretty stable for me unless I do serious messing around). Also, how "sturdy" is the OS? For example, if system files were to be damaged or deleted (if that is even possible).

2. Hardware compatability - All of the hardware I've bought has all been bought with the idea that it would be used in my Windows machine. About half of it seems like I'd have trouble with it in Linux. Here's a quick rundown of my system:

Ali Magik chipset motherboard (Iwill XP333-R) w/Athlon XP1700
Geforce 2MX 400 AGP
Matrox ATA133 PCI adapter card
Intel PCI DSL modem
D-link wireless network card (802.11b)
Soundblaster Live
TV tuner card (BT878)
USB devices: Epson printer, Gravis gamepad, Logitech webcam, APC UPS

I don't expect anyone to look all the hardware up on compatibility lists, but just by glance how much does it look like will work well? Things like the wireless networking and DSL modem would be among the most important things I'd need.

3. Software - I have a large amount of media, and playback of it is extremely important. I assume I'll be able to do things like playback MPEG1/2, DVD discs (and others like AVI/Divx, WMV, RM, etc), and burn CD-Rs. I also rip DVDs and CDs for my own use. Next is games. There is a version of WINE that has DX8 in it I hear, so that may help with that. I have a large amount of games (Everquest, Counterstrike, Dungeon Siege, many more), so being able to play those would be nice.

So, what does everyone think? Am I stuck with Windows for years to come, or is there a possible future Linux user here? Would it be better to stick with Windows because of my hardware and software? Sorry for so many questions, by the way.
 
1) Yea, its a really, really stable OS. Its really easy to mess it up completly if you are signed on as the administrative user (called root in linux) all the time. Don't do this. This is bad 🙂

2) the wireless networking is going to be fun setting up 🙂 I'm still working on getting mine working in linux. The TV tuner might be iffy, although I've never set one up before. Same thing with the webcam. I know there's some software out there for the UPS...but I think it mainly with a serial connection instead of USB.

The ATA controller should be fine...maybe 🙂 DSL modem...eh...maybe. Normally the DSL modem is external and hooks up through a network card. I don't know how well supported internal DSL modems are.

3) the only video format thats not supported real well in linux is quicktime.

I'd recomend keeping windows around for games. Linux isn't quite there yet, even with wine. Very few games work very well. They almost always work better under windows.

 
Hmm, lots of "ifs" and "maybes" there :/

I have this feeling Linux may have a large boost in popularity and usability in the next few years, so that is part of the reason I'd like to get familiar with the OS.

If it's really necessary that I keep Windows for games, I would probably buy another computer (one of those small ones in a case the size of a toaster, reviewed on Anandtech).

I don't suppose it is possible to run both OSes at once? (some wishful thinking here...)
 
I don't know to much about your hardware. To be sure though their are people who have the same stuff and know how to set it up. One of the strengths of Linux is it's documentation. Just do a search with you hardware followed by Linux and within 20-30 min you will know what's up with that stuff and putting two OS's on one computer is common.

IHO X windows is a good replacement for the windows gui, if all you are going to use it for is apps. As far as using gui configuration interfaces go it is pretty much strictly up to your distro. I use command line almost exclusively for configuring the system.

Linux is very stable, since Unix was designed ground up as a multiuser server/mainframe environment it keeps everything the user does very isolated from the core operating system. If something screws up in your X windows or your terminal than you can 95% of the time just press ctrl+alt F2 (or F1 thru F6) to switch to a new virtual console and 'kill' the offending program. If It screws up your stuff so bad that the keyboard is not accepting input, then you can telnet in and fix it remotely.

Unix is completely network integrated, not like Windows (or what XP tries to pretend to be).

Memory leaks from programs are easily dealt with simply shutting down the program. One of the most refreshing differences between Linux and windows is that as Linux runs for weeks on end is that you don't have the gradual loss of system resources as stuff accumulates. If X windows is running slow or something is hogging resources you just shut X down and start it up. It takes about 10 seconds. No more reboots when you sit down in the evening to do something and everything is running dog slow!

Same things that crash Windows will crash Linux. What has killed me is when I am playing Quake3 and everything seizes up. It is very rare, but it happens. (I put another fan in the case and it hasn't happened since (knock on wood)).

You can go into the kernel and completely modify it. The stock Linux kernel you get distros is usually packed full of stuff you will never need like scsi support, various motherboard chipsets support, USB mouse support etc etc. The drivers for Linux are called kernel modules, and often you will load them up into memory (usually automaticly at boot time) to run you devices. However, the good thing is you can get the actual latest version of the Linux kernel source code off the internet and compile your own custom kernel. You can compile modules directly into kernel and remove unwanted things from it. This will give you a nice performance boost, however the down side if you don't configure the kernel correctly it can cause irritating problems. (compiling a new kernel its pretty easy to do: 2-3 times doing it it will be second nature, no more time consuming than installing drivers in Windows)

Unix and X window has been around before DOS, Admins everywhere were using a multiuser, gui-ed environment, 32bit , operating environment when most people were dealing with "dir /p" or figuring out how the hell to install the new joystick or get the jumpers set correctly on the new soundblaster. (either that or playing with the Oscar the grouch in the trash bin). This lends directly to the stability of Unix in general; It's been around longer all most of the major bugs have been worked out a long time ago. Modern desktop programs are not much more stable than ones you get in Windows. Mozilla; although it can handle tabs (a very big plus), it screws up every once and a while just like Explorer does, ex the Java support still fills up the memory when you play online Java games to long (I think I have much fewer problems than my roommate with his windows2k's explorer...) . The big difference is that you can recover all your resources in 30 sec with no reboot or no clt+alt+del and searching thru vague menus for the bad proggy that won't turn off.

Anything in Linux you can fix, If something goes wrong you can repair It or replace any part of the OS. you can copy directory to directory from one hardrive to a replacement hardrive, and everything will work fine. You can build up your Linux version from scratch taking peaces hodge podge from one distro or the next, or getting it all yourself from source code and you can make it work. (Like everything of course this depends on your skill level).

Unix command line is merciless if you are running it from root (sys administrator account, or superuser). One bad 'rm' (deleter command) can remove your entire system.... ie: 'rm -rf /'
Of course if you be sure to do everything a regular user, it is pretty much impossible to screw things up too bad this way (even if you tried).

Some more big pluses for Linux is:

Programming Support: Linux is a programmer/hacker wet dream compared to Windows for programming. Perl scripting, C, C++, Java ( and a variety of other languages), Programming editors, hex editors, compilers etc etc are a integral part of any Linux distro and almost required part of the OS, with very well documented standards. In Linux everything is written in C, and 99 percent of all source code is available and is completely legal to modify or distribute any part of it (with some wise restrictions of course). The Freedom you get from this can be addictive.

Internet support. You can run professional level servers on you home PC. TCP/IP is almost Unix born. It was integrated in every version since the late 70's. Apache is the #1 web server in the internet (at 60-odd percent) and it comes with every major distribution. FTP, SSH, Telnet, NFS, Samba, file and print servers are available standard among others. You can set up a box to be a ethernet(/dsl/cablemodem/'csu/dsu'/fiberoptic/tolken ring/T1/fddi) router/firewall (i use one for my cable modem to protect my household LAN) and it's pretty much second nature to Linux.

Viruses are hackers are not a major problem that it is in Windows. It's up to the user, though, to harden the system against attacks. Most step you can take in securing you OS is simple and effective. Security is #1 priority in system design, every bit of source code is reviewed and reviewed and reviewed by every hacker, system administrator, (even FBI has contributed code) for bugs, backdoors, any bad design. (they want know it works before they put their professional reputations) Nobody's perfect and there are bugs in every bit of software ever made, But fix's are usually made by the discoverer off the bug and patches come within weeks of exposed weakness. Linux can't hide behind secrecy and law-enforced ignorance for it's security like Microsoft can.

AND

If you used command line in DOS, you will love it in Linux. The BASH shell is very mature and has features that make you wonder how the hell you ever could stand to use DOS, like press TAB for command completion.

(I am just beginning to learn about this script stuff ---->) A very big thing in Unix/Linux are 'tools'. These are very well written small programs that do very specific tasks. Like 'ls' (like dir), 'grep' (filters output thru a word sequence),'date' (show date/time), more (pauses info a screen full at a time for easy viewing), less (opposite of more), cat (prints out file content to a screen). Using pipes '|' and redirects '>, >>, 2>, <, <<' you can string together tools to create useful programs, and you can put these in files and execute them (like batch files but 10x better).
here are a couple or examples:

ls -lR / 2> /dev/null | grep quake > search.txt

(this will search thru your entire directory system and puts a list any entries in files or directory containing 'quake' in there name in a text file 'search.txt')

date >> /root/userlog; who >> /root/userlog; ps -aux >> /root/userlog; cat userlog | less

(if you were to put this in a file named 'bob' and make the file executionable and put it the /usr/sbin folder... Every time you were a superuser (root) and typed out bob and pressed enter it would take a snapshot of your system: it would pout the date and time of you the ran the program, all the users that were all logged on the computer, and the programs that were running(sorted by user) and append this info at the end of a file in your root's home directory named 'userlog' and then print out the entire file to the screen in a format in which you could see it a screen full at a time or be able to scroll up and down line by line. This way you could make a simple log of user activity if you think someone is up to no good or you suspect someone of hogging all the resources...) 🙂

As far a Windows vs Linux is concerned,
Windows is a good OS for businesses that don't want to deal with a lot of training or specialized techs. The only problems you will face is having to deal with a very dangerous internet. You will have to depend on third-party vendors for firewalls, and services that are not offered by Microsoft. You will have to depend on Bill gates for all your updates and deal with very unfriendly and restrictive copyright stuff. This all adds up to money spent. Sometimes it worth it have support contracted from other businesses but often the money you saved by not hiring skilled workers and admins can be lost if a hacker or unethical competitor damages you system or steals information. This threat, of course, is not eliminated by using Unix, sometimes it can be worse. It's all up to the caliber of the people that you have working for you. If your hackers are better at protecting your interests, than malicious ones are at attacking you than you can rest easy at night (windows can benefit from good admins, too, just in a lesser extent) . Unix's proven track record of having less administration overhead, it's versatility, and excellent scalability make it a very attractive solution.

In the home user market Linux offers a interesting way of interacting with a computer. It does very well at the standard uses that a normal person might use it for. It can word process as well as any other OS. It has good web browsers (which are a bit more advanced then Explorer), e-mail clients. A multitude of simple games. Very nice image manipulation and viewing programs. You can pick up a installation cd for under 20 dollars online, or you can download it free. My first Linux distro was Redhat 7.0. I got the 3 cd set with a 500+ page user manual ("Linux User Bible "or some such) for 46 dollars. This is a lot better than ninety-six dollars for a XP upgrade. The next frontier in the end-user market for Linux is in games (for which it is sorely lacking). One promising program is WineX. Transgaming technologies advertise that their product can provide support for Window's API in Linux. They have versions of the latest games such as Grand Theft Auto III (ya baby), Sims, Warcraft III, Kohan, and Unreal. Instead of buying WineX outright, you pay a subscription to there services. It's 5 bucks a month and you can download the latest versions of WineX, game installers, and do things like voting on what games or features Transgamer should concentrate on next, (I haven't tried this yet because I am to damn poor to go the store and buy games to try out.... *sob*)


hope that helps ya.



Wow that was a lot of typing I was on a roll (my brain bursts open unto the keyboard)... You guys can use this info for anything you want.....
 
Wow, long, but good read 🙂 Thanks for replying.

For the past couple hours I've been busy downloading RedHat ISOs from linuxiso.org, I'm going to make a partition with a couple GB of space on one of my drives and install it there. I guess I will have to dual-boot with Windows XP. Gotta figure out how I'll go about doing that though. Any performance drawbacks of having a Linux partition on a Win XP NTFS drive? Would it be better to have a drive dedicated to Linux (this is if I can get it up and running over the next few weeks)?
 
mm... what do you mean better? faster? i guess i'm just not seeing why you would switch (aside from sheer novelty)
 
It's usually easier to have a seperate harddrive if you can. I have win98 set up (for wine) on seperate harddrive, this way I can just boot into it using the selective boot feature in my bios. This is the easiest way possible.

The standard way of doing things is to use lilo to set up the boot loader. This program will go into the MBR of the master harddrive (or the beginnig of the partition, or a boot floppy disk). This would replace the window's bootloader, which may or may not be desirable. I found that linux's lilo loader is [retty easy to use. Of course if you screw something it will make both your OS's unaccesable exept thru a recovery disk or CD.

There is also grub which is simalar to lilo, but I have no experiance with it. To many it is better than lilo. There is loadlin which will boot Linux from a dos partition. You can also set up window's loader to boot into linux, see faqs for details....

I would recommend telling lilo (or whatever Redhat uses) to put the boot record on a floppy disk. That way if something bad happens you can still boot into the fresh linux installation from the installation CD. And Windows will be safe. Once you get it working well then go ahead and put the linux loader into the MBR.

tip:

the nomanclatcure for linux hard drives and partitions are weird when you are coming from Windows. When you pick the harddrives they are represented by files in the /dev/ directory. so the first (i'll asume you have ide and not scsi hardrives) drive is /dev/hda the second is /dev/hdb, third, /dev/hdb and so on. the first partition on the first harddive is /dev/hda1, the 3rd partition on the 2nd harddrive would be /dev/hdb3 etc etc.

see Hard Drive -A partition 1
 
Well, that is kind of the input I am looking for...

I've been noticing that my Windows XP installation has slowly starting screwing up, for reasons I don't know. Eventually I assume I'll have to do the same thing as with all Windows installtions, and that's a total reinstallation. That's the kind of thing I can live without. So far, it seems I'll also be getting more stability, and I won't need to pay large amounts of money for the next version of the OS. Saving money is probably one of the more attractive points of this.

So, do you think that I would be better off not bothering with this?
 
heh, i ducked out of windows after w2k came out. I use Slackware 8.1 now. When I have to fix my dad's computer with XP it just gives me a headache.
 
Back
Top