Linux - A thing of wonder

Well that means Walmart did a crap job of educating its customers.

People, en masse, are sheep. They need to be provoked into thinking. They need to be told that, yes, there are such things as different OSs; no, Linux is not Windows; no, your Windows software will not run on Linux; yes, you can download alternative software; yes, it's free. And they need to be told this in a clear, informative manner, not have it either chucked down their throats or overlooked entirely.

As it stands, regardless of how good as it is, Linux simply isn't a suitable mass-market OS.

You just listed 4 shops that don't exist in the UK (under those names at least). I hear the UN are looking for a new Anglo-American ambassador... :D

sorry, never been to the UK, so I can't name what computer stores they have there, but if you go into a computer or electronics store in the UK, are the shelves lined with linux software?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by penagate

As it stands, regardless of how good as it is, Linux simply isn't a suitable mass-market OS.

---

Then the mass market consumers should all be flogged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

sorry, never been to the UK, so I can't name what computer stores they have there, but if you go into a computer or electronics store in the UK, are the shelves lined with linux software?

---

PC World has 3 copies of Suse 9.2...under a tarp...out the back.

But thats a good start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wossname

Then the mass market consumers should all be flogged.

---

I think having to use Windows is punishment enough.

other than Linux itself... You can get a few flavors of linux in compusa, etc.. over here..

but I am talking software to INSTALL on linux.. sure you might find a few hybrid apps that will install on either windows or linux, but those are few and far between, and there are NONE that I have seen that are linux exclusive.

But who looks for 'nix software in a shop anyway?

when you can get it over the internet anyway!

You mean InstallShield or something?

There are many installers for linux. Often each flavour has its own. Fedora has Yum or RPM, debian has apt-get, suse has yast and so on.

nah you guys are missing the point..

my point is the average non computer savvy consumer that shops at walmart, will buy their kid this PC because its cheap and they think its just an entry level type PC. Only to find out it has linspire on it, and their software choices not only just changed, but everyone they know is running windows because they bought a real PC, and not some walmart trying to be cheap piece of garbage.

And that isn't meant to take anything away from Linux itself, its just linux is obviously meant for someone looking specifically for an alternative to windows or mac OSX, not people who shop at walmart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

my point is the average non computer savvy consumer that shops at walmart, will buy their kid this PC because its cheap and they think its just an entry level type PC.

---

People like that deserve to be disappointed.

cue post 61.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

Anyone had luck running Linux on a virtual server or virtual PC?

I am pretty sure MS said they are supporting running linux on it, however I tried to install ubuntu 6.1 and it installed, but the display is all corrupted. I tried setting the resolution at the boot menu to 800x600, but no luck. I could install it in textmode, but as soon as the GUI boots it is useless...

I personally am not a huge fan of linux, there isnt enough driver support, too many flavors (and MS gets blamed for having too many windows versions), and maybe I am biased because I am a Microsoft junkie, but windows is just plain better... sure its got its problems, an OS is no simple program, but its still better.

I suppose if linux was the dominante OS, there would be less issues, but would there be as many companies peddeling their version?

---

The display issue caused by most linux distributions defaulting at 24bit color mode. Virtual PC can't work in this display mode, so it makes the display look stretched and messes up the colors. You need to get into /etc/X11/xorg.conf and change some line(can't remember what it says exactly) from 24 to 16. You'll be able to find it because there is only one line that has just a value of 24.

There is some ctrl-alt sequence of keys you can use to get into a terminal session from an X session. I don't remember what it is, but maybe someone here remembers. Once you are there, you can edit the xorg.conf file.

Once you do this, switch back to the X display session(again, someone else needs to post how to do that) and hit ctrl-alt-backspace to restart the X server. When it comes back, it should display correctly.

As for the "which distro is best" argument, everyone seems to have their own favorite distro of linux. There isn't a clear best distribution as each have their strengths and weaknesses. Some distributions are better suited for certain environments and some distributions require more knowledge of linux than others. I personally use kubuntu because I liked what I read about ubuntu but I hate the gnome desktop environment. I recommend trying a few different distributions and seeing which one you prefer the most.

Ctrl-alt- plus F1 through F10. F7 is typically the X session.

thanks arrow, I will try and let u know how I make out.

You're going to make out with a linux box? Remember to use a firewall.

ok so from a fresh boot, before I actually install ubuntu to the hard drive, can I make this change to 16bit color? If so, where?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

ok so from a fresh boot, before I actually install ubuntu to the hard drive, can I make this change to 16bit color? If so, where?

---

An ubuntu install is just a copy of the cd image with some hardware configuration. You'll have to edit xorg.conf after install.

sudo nano /etc/X11/xorg.conf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

I am not looking to dual boot, I am only looking to run linux in a virtual machine. I don't have enough machines to play with to just waste one on a linux install that I will use just to monkey around.

I had tried Fedora Core 6 a few months back when it first came out on a compaq PC (with intel graphics chipset) and I had a display issue with that as well. (and that was on its own box, not virtual)

I wanted to install virtual images of ubuntu, fedora, and suse just to have them

---

Run your Virtual Machine with VMWare server. Its free and a lot better than MS Virtual PC.

is there anyway to boot in text mode or something, I can hardly read the text to even try to get where I need to be

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by visualAd

Run your Virtual Machine with VMWare server. Its free and a lot better than MS Virtual PC.

---

does it let you remote manage multiple systems at the same time through a webpage interface?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

is there anyway to boot in text mode or something, I can hardly read the text to even try to get where I need to be

---

Either edit /etc/inittab and change this line:

Code:

---

id:5:initdefault:

---

to:

Code:

---

id:3:initdefault:

---

Or when it's booting, hit E to edit the boot configuration and append a space then the number 3 on to the kernel line.

That will boot into run level 3 - multiuser mode.

I was able to get in by hitting escape at the GRUB menu and selecting recovery mode. That gave me just a console, and I was able to get in and edit the file, however changing the one value I found of "24" to "16" didn't change anything. I don't see anything else that would indicate a different color depth. Any ideas?

It looks like this

Code:

---

SubSection "Display"
    Depth    16
    Modes    "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
EndSubSection

---

There are other subsections above it, all with same resolution, but depth is 1,4,8,15, and 16 (was 24)

Anything else I should try changing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

I was able to get in by hitting escape at the GRUB menu and selecting recovery mode. That gave me just a console, and I was able to get in and edit the file, however changing the one value I found of "24" to "16" didn't change anything. I don't see anything else that would indicate a different color depth. Any ideas?

It looks like this

Code:

---

SubSection "Display"
    Depth    16
    Modes    "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
EndSubSection

---

There are other subsections above it, all with same resolution, but depth is 1,4,8,15, and 16 (was 24)

Anything else I should try changing?

---

So you actually have ubuntu installed or is that the livecd? Whatever changes you make to a session running off the livecd don't save when you turn off the machine. If you did get ubuntu installed, how did you install it without getting the display to work?

Installed.

I installed it from the DVD using textmode and that worked ok. Then when it boots from the hard drive, it boots into the GUI which is where my issue is with the display.

So I rebooted, selected recovery mode, which gave me just a command prompt after it loaded everything. From there I edited the conf file you mentioned, and changed 24 to 16, but I still get the same results.

I confirmed that I infact DID save the conf file and all that fun stuff.

As visualAd pointed out ,try vmware player .Its free and fully supports Linux without any changes.

I am well aware of VMWare, but he didn't answer my question as to if it supports the same feature set for remote management that Virtual Server does. It would also need to run on Vista.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wossname

Not only did linux fail to boot, but it also managed to switch off my secondary IDE channel too!

Wow, nice going linux, now I understand why you are so popular with people that require stable and reliable systems.

I'm going to celebrate this happiest of occasions with simply giving up on you forever. You will never again break my laptop (first it was Suse that broke a large portion of my paimary disc which I have yet to be able to recover and now Knoppix decides to hang every time I boot from the CD.

And I've apparently just wasted £35 on a ****ing linux book.

*******!

*screams*
*gnashing of teeth*

*no beer left...cries*

---

What version were you using? I recommend Fedora or Red Hat. Linux is pretty cool to play around with, though I'd never use it as an everyday OS.

Its mainly good for IT learning. LOTS of companies are migrating to Linux.
And Linux is more stable than Windows serverwise, if the function is simple and straightforward as say to send out mail or store data.

Stripping out all that extra services and crap, makes Linux more stable. Not as many moving parts. Everything is transparent, from the IP Ports you block via editing a config file to every process running on your machine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

does it let you remote manage multiple systems at the same time through a webpage interface?

---

It has a web interface and a client application. You can use either to manage the Virtual machines.

http://pubs.vmware.com/guestnotes/ww...tml/wwhelp.htm
lists all oses supported by vmware and the server version of vmware has a remote management interface.

can you run multiple VMs at the same time and network them?

Oh yes ,of course you can.

I guess I could install both being that its all free software I am working with.

ubuntu installs like a breeze on vmware .Once setup ,you can install samba to network it with your windows clients.

You can now buy processors that support virtualisation. In effect, this completely removes the need for virutalisation at application level or hyper-virtulisation through kernel patches etc, as the processor contains two execution domains.

The fact that the virtualisation is carried out at the processor level means that the speed of the VM is almost as fast as the host machine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by visualAd

You can now buy processors that support virtualisation. In effect, this completely removes the need for virutalisation at application level or hyper-virtulisation through kernel patches etc, as the processor contains two execution domains.

The fact that the virtualisation is carried out at the processor level means that the speed of the VM is almost as fast as the host machine.

---

The application needs to support virtualization to make use of it. Virtual PC 2004 doesn't support virtualization. VPC 2007 will. I'm unaware as to whether VMWare does or not.

I think Virtual Server 2005 R2 does, which is what I am using, although I would have to look further into that to be sure.

Another happy customer. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arrow_Raider

The application needs to support virtualization to make use of it. Virtual PC 2004 doesn't support virtualization. VPC 2007 will. I'm unaware as to whether VMWare does or not.

---

VMWare and the Xen hypervisor for linux both support it.