Installed Ubuntu Linux 9.10 the other day

[JRThro]

So, one of my PC's has been acting up lately. Failure to boot every now and then, very slow, no apparent virus infestation.

Finally it would only boot up into Windows' diagnostic screen, which let me run a disk diagnostic that indicated hard disk problems. (Maybe. I could be remembering this wrong.)

So I tried donig a system restore, which appeared to work but refused to boot.

So I tried a clean install from the super-special Windows installation partition (or something) on the hard disk. That appeared to work but also refused to boot.

So I made a live CD of Ubuntu Linux 9.10 and tried it out. It also indicated there were hard disk problems. I did the install anyway, but it refused to boot.

So I went to Fry's and got a 500 GB Toshiba hard disk for $59.95 and installed it in the computer.

Then I installed the Ubuntu Linux again. It's about as easy to use as Windows, and even my kids can use it with no help.

Networking works, Firefox works, playing music and videos works (after downloading a few codecs).

It's amazingly simple, particularly since it sees my Windows network and the two Vista machines on it, and can access shared Windows files, mostly music and videos, but also my model rocketry folder where I keep all of my, er, model rocketry stuff on an external USB hard disk on one of the Vista machines.

 

[tbzep]

Shhhh. Don't tell anybody. They will call you a fanboy.

 

[cjl]

I use and like Ubuntu on one of my machines, and it's a good OS. I prefer windows 7 for most tasks, but Ubuntu is an excellent alternative.

 

[JRThro]

Shhhh. Don't tell anybody. They will call you a fanboy.

Even if I only installed it because my Windows machine was hosed and I didn't have a copy of Vista to re-install?

 

[Mikus]

Even if I only installed it because my Windows machine was hosed and I didn't have a copy of Vista to re-install?

I'm liking Windows 7. No more Vista for me thank you.

 

[Pem Tech]

So I made a live CD of Ubuntu Linux 9.10 and tried it out.
It's amazingly simple, particularly since it sees my Windows network and the two Vista machines on it, and can access shared Windows files, mostly music and videos, but also my model rocketry folder where I keep all of my, er, model rocketry stuff on an external USB hard disk on one of the Vista machines.

AACCKK!
:y:

Another fanboy!!

 

[accooper]

I have been using Ubuntu since 7.10, and I really like it. It is more secure than Windows or Mac will ever be, no virus problems. Although I will say that I have had more problems with 9.10 than any other version. Mostly it refusing to automount hard drives like 9.04 would. But this is a small problem. I also get ALL my Windows programs to run on it, including RocSim, and Open Rocket.

Andrew From Texas

 

[andytherocketeer]

Wierd. 9.10 has been the most stable for me, although 9.04 was pretty stable.
Not bought a Windows licence since 2001, and don't have a specific urge to do so right now either.

OpenRocket is coming along nicely. Sims I've done so far seem to be pretty much in line with Rocksim, WinRoc etc.

 

[Pem Tech]

I have been using Ubuntu since 7.10, and I really like it. It is more secure than Windows or Mac will ever be, no virus problems. Although I will say that I have had more problems with 9.10 than any other version. Mostly it refusing to automount hard drives like 9.04 would. But this is a small problem. I also get ALL my Windows programs to run on it, including RocSim, and Open Rocket.

Andrew From Texas

Wo wo wo...
Ubuntu will run WIndows programs?
Even on a Mac?

This would be great for my needs!

 

[JRThro]

Wo wo wo...
Ubuntu will run WIndows programs?
Even on a Mac?

This would be great for my needs!

Probably under wine, I would guess.

But Andrew will have to tell us exactly how he's doing it.

 

[rocket9005]

I use openSuse here, though I'm not currently running it as I type this. I last installed 11.0, they just released 11.2. I like it, no problems and runs quickly on my ancient 4 year old machine.

 

[cjl]

I have been using Ubuntu since 7.10, and I really like it. It is more secure than Windows or Mac will ever be, no virus problems. Although I will say that I have had more problems with 9.10 than any other version. Mostly it refusing to automount hard drives like 9.04 would. But this is a small problem. I also get ALL my Windows programs to run on it, including RocSim, and Open Rocket.

Andrew From Texas

It's nice, I agree (though I've never had any issues with viruses on Vista or 7), but my one major complaint about it is that it has a terrible battery life on notebooks. Win7 does far better than Ubuntu on the same notebook for battery life, at least in my experience.

 

[accooper]

Through Wine. BUT, and it a big BUT, you must install all windows programs through wine to get them to work.

Andrew

 

[dixontj93060]

The last time I attempted to install Ubuntu (as I recalll an 8-something version) on a Dell DuoCore laptop. it had zero wireless network driver support. Granted, I didn't spend much time searching for drivers, but has this changed with 9.10? If not, where do you get the most stable drivers so I'll have them on hand?

 

[tbzep]

The last time I attempted to install Ubuntu (as I recalll an 8-something version) on a Dell DuoCore laptop. it had zero wireless network driver support. Granted, I didn't spend much time searching for drivers, but has this changed with 9.10? If not, where do you get the most stable drivers so I'll have them on hand?

I have booted with a live disk on my wife's Dell laptop and had good wireless from the get go. It's been a while, probably a couple years, so it was likely 7.x version, maybe 8.x. I wonder if your laptop had a fairly new wireless mini-card that didn't have drivers ready at the time?

 

[dixontj93060]

The computer was just over a year old at the time. But I'd think whatever is standard in the Dell Insprion line would be supported. From what I saw in browsing user group posts their were specific statements about "no wirless support." And if you do a fresh boot from Ubuntu, I don't know how it would know to use XP low level drivers (my intension was to never use Windows again). Anyway, that's when I "punted." Maybe I should try again...

I have booted with a live disk on my wife's Dell laptop and had good wireless from the get go. It's been a while, probably a couple years, so it was likely 7.x version, maybe 8.x. I wonder if your laptop had a fairly new wireless mini-card that didn't have drivers ready at the time?

 

[andytherocketeer]

My set up is basically as follows:
stock Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala (64bit x86_64 version on the desktop and Macbook, 32bit Netbook Remix on the eeePC 901).

Then I have latest Virtualbox, with Windows 2000 as guest OS (on desktop & eeePC). In fact I can create the VM on the destop and export it to the eeePC, and was rather impressed at the speed on the eeePC.

Within the guest Win2000 VM, I can run Rocksim plus Altacc, Perfectflite and RDAS software (complete with USB serial passthrough - but you need the full version, not the one in the Ubuntu etc. repository).

For most sims recently though I've been using OpenRocket which is Open Source, and multiplatform. So far I've only used it in Linux, but others are using it in Windows and OSX. Early days yet, but it's looking promising.

 

[WiK]

It's nice, I agree (though I've never had any issues with viruses on Vista or 7), but my one major complaint about it is that it has a terrible battery life on notebooks. Win7 does far better than Ubuntu on the same notebook for battery life, at least in my experience.

That's a fair point, the reported battery life on my Eee 901 is less on Ubuntu than it was on Windoze XP, even taking battery wear into account. I've not done any proper testing on it though. The difference in boot times more than makes up for it, IMO.

Overall, however, Ubuntu is a much nicer OS to use on a netbook than XP was. Can't comment on Windoze 7, but seeing as it's so similar to Vista I'm safely assuming that Ubuntu is better on a netbook than that, too.

Phil (been using Ubuntu on and off since Warty)

 

[cjl]

That's a fair point, the reported battery life on my Eee 901 is less on Ubuntu than it was on Windoze XP, even taking battery wear into account. I've not done any proper testing on it though. The difference in boot times more than makes up for it, IMO.

Overall, however, Ubuntu is a much nicer OS to use on a netbook than XP was. Can't comment on Windoze 7, but seeing as it's so similar to Vista I'm safely assuming that Ubuntu is better on a netbook than that, too.

Phil (been using Ubuntu on and off since Warty)

Well, I'm running 7 (the RC - I'm too cheap to buy a $100 OS for a $300 computer) on my Eee, and it runs fine. I'd say that win7 is much better than Vista at it's ability to run on low-spec systems. I'll probably go back to Ubuntu (what I was running on it before) once the RC expires, but for now, I can honestly say that I like win7 on an eee.

Compared to vista, that's a huge step (and I liked Vista, you just needed something a lot better than an eee for it to run well).

 

[lessgravity]

i've been using Linux since 1994. It's come along way.

If you have had trouble in the past I suggest you try Ubuntu's latest releases. If you are unaware of the "Live CD" let me briefly explain. Most major Linux releases are now offered as Live CD's. Live CD's are downloadable for free from your favorite Linux distro. Download and burn the CD. Now boot your Desktop or Laptop from the CD. This gives you a method of testing the Operating System before installing. Remember however because you are running the system from a CD things are slow they will greatly improve if you decide to install the OS on the harddrive. I highly recommend Ubuntu's Karmic Koala (9.10) as a great replacement for Windoz.
Here is a recent screen shot of my Ubuntu Laptop

I'm in IT and I work everyday in Win 7, Mac OS-X and Linux. At home my main machine is Ubuntu Karmic. I love it and prefer it. I'm not a fanboy but it is the best fit for me. I am a big fan of the Free software movement and love the freedom of a free OS and free software.
FYI- Google Chromium Browser is about twice as fast as Firefox on Ubuntu. It's changed my browser preference. You don't see those speeds with Chrome on Windows.

For you Windoz fans out there I do give much kudos to Microsoft for Win 7. It is a huge improvement over Vista.

 

[JRThro]

I've played with Linux a few times over the years, but never stuck with it for long. In fact, one of our other PC's is a dual-boot machine that goes to a Xandros boot loader screen before we let it boot Windows XP by default.

The only actual difficulties I've had with the Ubuntu Linux machine, noting that I set it up less than a week ago, are:
1. trying to print to my Lexmark X1100 printer on the Windows network, and
2. figuring out how to put shortcuts (launchers? links?) to shared Windows network folders on the Linux desktop so I have quick access to my music and video files. The other 3 PC's on the network are all Windows machines with "Music" and "Movies" shortcuts on their desktops.

The music player I'm using (could be mplayer, but I don't remember right now) *did* add all of the music to its database with no problems once I pointed it to the right Windows network folder, so that was pretty cool.

A major positive that I've seen with the Ubuntu Linux machine is how quickly it starts up and shuts down. Like 10-15 seconds tops, instead of 30 seconds or more with the Windows machines.

 

[tbzep]

You can middle click on a regular folder and drag it to the desktop to make a shortcut. Maybe you can try that on your network folder.

When I had a shared printer hooked to a computer, I had to go with static IP's on all the computers and printer for it to work. Now that I have a printer that can hook directly into the router, I can let the router assign IP's, which is the default setting, IIRC.

 

[Winston]

Well, I'm running 7 (the RC - I'm too cheap to buy a $100 OS for a $300 computer) on my Eee, and it runs fine. I'd say that win7 is much better than Vista at it's ability to run on low-spec systems. I'll probably go back to Ubuntu (what I was running on it before) once the RC expires, but for now, I can honestly say that I like win7 on an eee.

Compared to vista, that's a huge step (and I liked Vista, you just needed something a lot better than an eee for it to run well).

I've had Win 7 RC since its release on one relatively low-spec desktop, the same on my now dead primary PC (runs really slow now; literally takes forever to do anything), and Win7 Home Premium on my new laptop. Love Win7. Hated Vista. I was in the User Beta Program for Vista and learned quickly that it was a real dog, at least at its initial release. When my brother needed a laptop in 2007, he ended up with a multi-gigahetz dual core machine whose Vista desktop was slower than the XP desktop my ancient, Celeron 650 laptop that I now use solely as an MP3 server for my entertainment system.

I've been using Ubuntu for quite a while and it has remained the simplest Linux flavor to install and use. And I especially like the relatively recent ability to easily install it to a USB flash drive for a very quick boot on any machine that can boot from USB. 9.04 was unusually buggy from what I've heard and from my own experience (Nforce onboard NIC hardware wouldn't work). 9.10 works fine.

 

[JRThro]

You can middle click on a regular folder and drag it to the desktop to make a shortcut. Maybe you can try that on your network folder.

When I had a shared printer hooked to a computer, I had to go with static IP's on all the computers and printer for it to work. Now that I have a printer that can hook directly into the router, I can let the router assign IP's, which is the default setting, IIRC.

Middle click as in click with the wheel? I'll try that and see.

 

[tbzep]

Middle click as in click with the wheel? I'll try that and see.

Yes. Click and drag.

 

[JRThro]

Yes. Click and drag.

Thanks, Tim. That did the trick!
:clap:

Now to figure out how to change that launcher icon with the spring under it to something else. That's really low-priority, though.

I think my inability to print probably has something to do with Windows network workgroup names. The Linux machine has the default workgroup name WORKGROUP, while the Windows machines are in the THROHOME workgroup. The Linux machine seems to be able to *see* the printer, but that's all it can do.

 

[tbzep]

Thanks, Tim. That did the trick!
:clap:

Now to figure out how to change that launcher icon with the spring under it to something else. That's really low-priority, though.

I think my inability to print probably has something to do with Windows network workgroup names. The Linux machine has the default workgroup name WORKGROUP, while the Windows machines are in the THROHOME workgroup. The Linux machine seems to be able to *see* the printer, but that's all it can do.

You're welcome.

Low priority is my specialty. To change the icon image, right click on the launcher icon you are wanting to change, then select properties. There will be an icon on the upper left hand corner of the box that pops up. Click on that icon. Browse to the new icon image and select it. Click open and you're done.

It's been so long since I used a printer attached directly to a windows computer that I don't remember how to deal with it. Hopefully you'll sort it out before long.

 

[accooper]

Just got this from a book called Linux in a Windows World. It compares Linux to the new Windows 7. I found this book at half price books yesterday, and though this would be informative for all of us.

1.4. Comparing Linux and Windows Features

When deploying Linux, you must consider the overall feature sets of both Linux and its potential competitors. In an environment that's dominated by Windows, the most relevant comparison is often to Windows, so that comparison will be described in the rest of this chapter.



Linux shares many of its strengths with other Unix-like OSs, and particularly with other open source Unix-like OSs, such as FreeBSD. Linux is probably the most popular and fastest-growing of these OSs because of its dynamic community and large number of distributions. If you prefer to run, say, FreeBSD, you certainly may, and much of this book is applicable to such environments; however, this book does focus on Linux, and it doesn't always point out where FreeBSD or other Unix-like OSs fit into the picture.

Linux is a powerful operating system, but Microsoft's latest offerings (Windows 2003 and Windows XP) are also powerful. Important differences between the two OS families include the following:


Cost

Linux itself is low-cost, and this fact can be a big plus; however, the cost of the software is likely to be a small factor in the overall cost of running a computer. The TCO of Linux versus Windows is a matter of some debate, but it's likely to be lower for Linux if experienced Linux or Unix administrators are already available to deal with the system.

GUI orientation

All versions of Windows are largely tied to their GUIs; administering a Windows box without its GUI is virtually impossible. This linkage can make picking up Windows administration a bit easier for those unfamiliar with text-mode configuration, but it imposes some overhead on the computer itself, and it restricts the ways in which the system can be administered. These limitations are particularly severe for servers, which may not need a flashy GUI to handle mail or deliver IP addresses, except insofar as the OS itself requires these features. Linux, by contrast, is not nearly so GUI-oriented. Many distributions do provide GUI tools, but bypassing those tools to deal with the underlying text-mode configuration files and tools is usually a simple matter, provided you know where those files and tools are located and how to handle them.

Hardware requirements

In part because of Windows' reliance on its GUI, it requires slightly more powerful hardware than does an equivalent Linux server. This factor isn't extremely dramatic, though; chances are you won't be able to replace a 3-GHz Pentium 4 Windows system with a 200-MHz Pentium Linux system and achieve similar performance. Linux also runs on an extremely broad range of hardware platformsIA-32, AMD64, PowerPC, Sparc, and so on. On the other hand, in the IA-32 world, the vast majority of hardware comes with Windows drivers, whereas Linux driver support isn't quite as complete. Linux drivers are available for most, but not all, IA-32 hardware.

Software choices

Both Linux and Windows provide multiple choices for many server software categories, such as mail servers or FTP servers; however, those choices are different. The best choices depend on the server type and your specific needs. Much of this book focuses on servers that work very well for Linux and for which the Windows equivalents have problems of one sort or anothercost, reliability, flexibility, or something else.

Windows client integration

This issue is really one of server features. Many Windows server programs are designed around proprietary or semiproprietary Microsoft protocols, or provide extended features that can be accessed from Microsoft clients. For these functions, Linux servers must necessarily either play catch-up or use alternative protocols. For instance, the Samba server on Linux does not provide the full features of a Windows 2000 or 2003 Active Directory (AD) domain controller. Thus, if you want such features, you must run either the Windows server or find some other way to implement the features you want.

File compatibility

Because Linux doesn't run the popular Windows programs except under emulators, file format compatibility may be an issue. This can be a factor when you read your own existing files or exchange files with other sites (with clients, say). In the office field, OpenOffice.org provides very good, but not absolutely perfect, Microsoft Office document compatibility. Appendix B describe this issue in greater detail.

On the whole, Linux makes an excellent choice for many small, mid-sized, and even large servers that use open protocols. When the server uses proprietary protocols or Microsoft extensions, the situation may change. Linux can also be a good choice as a desktop OS, particularly if your organization isn't tied to proprietary Microsoft file formats.

Andrew From Texas

 

[Winston]

Because Linux doesn't run the popular Windows programs except under emulators, file format compatibility may be an issue.

Ay, there's the rub. The _vast_ collection of outstanding freeware of all kinds for WinOS systems keeps me predominantly in the Microsoft camp.

 

[user 13]

I'm a Mac guy. Have been for years. I needed a small computer for traveling and Apple is slow to get a netbook on the market so last spring I bought a Lenovo ideapad. I also needed to run a work program that ONLY runs in windows . The Lenovo is a nice little machine. It came with Windows XP. That lasted 2 days. Every time I tried to add any devices to the computer the drivers would start conflicting. Then a virus, and that was that!

So off to Ubuntu 9.04. Loved it ran great. My work program was running fine thru wine. Life was good. My only complaint was I could not get a DVD ripping program to work well in Ubuntu.

2 months ago my work program stopped working in Ubuntu! cant figure out why.

Now I'm using Windows 7. UGGGHHHH! It is the most annoying OS I have ever used. But I need to run this one program.

That's it, I'm moving back to MAC. Too bad, because I think Ubuntu is a better OS but I don't have time to fuss with it.