Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machine on a network?
in [Home Built PC]
|
Prev: don't Fail to miss 'fourteen'
Next: Has anybody ever connected a Linux machine to a Windows machine on a network?
From: John Williamson on 28 Mar 2010 07:16 RayLopez99 wrote: >> Just to show off, you understand, I've had Thunderbird in on a dual boot >> Windows and Linux box sharing a mailbox file without problems before >> now. The settings transferred perfectly, too. >> > > Again, you are the World's Smartest Man. I'm talking about a PhD > rocket scientist like myself, a self-made millionaire. What about the > rest of us John? And if you're not the W.S.M, then please don't like > and pretend setting up such a network was trivial. Probably took you > a few weeks minimum and a lot of grey hairs. > About an hour, including installing Thunderbird on Linux. A *real* smartalec would have set up symbolic links to the Windows preferences files from the Linux TB preferences directory so that preference changes happened in both at the same time. I just copied the files over, so that changes aren't automatically carried over. Setting up the link would have taken an extra two minutes or so. To be honest, I tried it for the hell of it and it "just worked" (tm). -- Tciao for Now! John.
From: John Williamson on 28 Mar 2010 07:25 RayLopez99 wrote: > On Mar 28, 12:13 am, John Williamson <johnwilliam...(a)btinternet.com> > wrote: >> RayLopez99 wrote: >>> Does it work? As the file formats are different, why would you even >>> do this, except to share a single internet connection? >>> But has anybody ever done this? >> Yes, many times. Now, for instance, where the machine I'm typing on is >> running XP, and the mail server is running Linux, as is the news server. >> >> Sharing document files between Open office on a Linux machine and Open >> Office on a Windows machine. >> >> Storing backups from Windows onto a Linux server. >> >> Next.... >> >> -- > > Pretty impressive. I do the same thing with XP (NTFS) and FAT32 (DOS) > with backups. Even though the file formats are different, I store, > using Norton Ghost, the XP backup files on DOS. Ghost has saved me > several times when I wanted to rollback XP because of a program that > would not uninstall. > > But John you are a computer guru, tremendous mind, etc etc, and it > probably took you a couple of months to set this up. What about us > lesser mortals? > Annoyingly for you, reading fom (And writing to) NTFS partitions from Linux works out of the box. Going the other way needs a (free of charge) program to be installed in Windows. Takes a few minutes to D/L and install. Also, Windows boxes and Linux boxes can easily be networked using Samba on the Linux box. As for connecting this Windows box to the Linux mail server, the hardest part was setting up the account. By the way, your attempt at sarcasm has been noted. -- Tciao for Now! John.
From: John Williamson on 31 Mar 2010 06:57 RayLopez99 wrote: > On Mar 30, 11:33 pm, John Williamson <johnwilliam...(a)btinternet.com> > wrote: > >> I did notice that most of the posts were along the lines of either "Is >> WEP or WPA encryption better?" and the answers, or "Thanks for making it >> so clear, it was easy to get working by following your instructions." >> > > Yeah, after YEARS and YEARS of working on it John. > > Let's face it: Linux has no Plug-and-Play. 'Nuff said. When was the last time you actually *used* a Linux system? If the answer is more than a couple of years ago, then you'll be surprised how much more "just works" nowadays. You may also be surprised at how much can be done through the GUI, too. Take a while to download Ubuntu, then install it inside Windows. It uninstalls afterwards just like any other program, and you can see how it's improved lately. The install you get has certain deliberate limitations, though, which can be worked round by installing as a dual boot system. Find it here:- http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download -- Tciao for Now! John.
From: John Williamson on 31 Mar 2010 09:46 RayLopez99 wrote: > On Mar 31, 12:57 pm, John Williamson <johnwilliam...(a)btinternet.com> > wrote: >> RayLopez99 wrote: > >>> Yeah, after YEARS and YEARS of working on it John. >>> Let's face it: Linux has no Plug-and-Play. 'Nuff said. >> When was the last time you actually *used* a Linux system? >> >> If the answer is more than a couple of years ago, then you'll be >> surprised how much more "just works" nowadays. You may also be surprised >> at how much can be done through the GUI, too. > > Fair point. That is indeed the allure of Linux. But the way I see > it, it's like passing by a crummy bar, club or pub that you visited > years ago and had a bad time in: no service, bad beer, rude bartender, > ugly barflies or worse, no girls at all. Now you pass by the > storefront a second time and see a new sign: "Under new management!". > Do you check it out, or do you assume it's just another ploy by the > owner to get customers (it's well known in the club management scene > that one owner typically controls several pubs/bars/clubs, even though > they seem to "compete" against each other--at least that's the way it > is in the USA and in GRE as well). Personally, I check it out, and more often than not, it's improved. Just as the one that I used to like a few years ago has sometimes turned into a dive. After all, what's the cost of the effort of walking through the door compared to the pleasure of finding that it *has* become a pleasant place to meet people? It's not hard to walk (straight) back out of the door, after all. The same way that installing Linux inside Windows takes a couple of hours for the computer, including the download time on broadband, of which you need to pay attention for maybe ten minutes, and uninstalling happens even more quickly. You can even use the computer while you're installing it, so there's very little time and effort involved for you. > > Nope, I may be a fool, but I'm no sucker. > So, you're just spamming us with your opinions, which seemingly are based on a single experience with Open Source software in the dim and distant past, then. You're not willing to make a minimal, no risk experiment to prove the validity of your claims to yourself, either. After all, someone clever enough to be a rocket scientist, who also claims not to have to work because they're so rich could easily make time for such an experiment, *if* they were telling the truth and were interested in finding things out. That indeed makes you a fool, and deliberately ignorant, and proves that your mind is inflexible and closed to new experiences. -- Tciao for Now! John.
From: John Williamson on 31 Mar 2010 23:08
RayLopez99 wrote: > On Mar 31, 3:46 pm, John Williamson <johnwilliam...(a)btinternet.com> > wrote: >> RayLopez99 wrote: > >>> Fair point. That is indeed the allure of Linux. But the way I see >>> it, it's like passing by a crummy bar, club or pub that you visited >>> years ago and had a bad time in: no service, bad beer, rude bartender, >>> ugly barflies or worse, no girls at all. Now you pass by the >>> storefront a second time and see a new sign: "Under new management!". >>> Do you check it out, >> Personally, I check it out, and more often than not, it's improved. Just >> as the one that I used to like a few years ago has sometimes turned into >> a dive. After all, what's the cost of the effort of walking through the >> door compared to the pleasure of finding that it *has* become a pleasant >> place to meet people? It's not hard to walk (straight) back out of the >> door, after all. > > Yes, but it takes time and effort to check out the bar--and some money > on drinks. Which you'd be buying anyway.... Also, if you don't make the effort, you'll *never* know what you've missed. The analogy with Linux: it takes an afternoon out of your > life (and don't deny it takes several hours, minimum, to install > Linux) to install Linux--and several DAYS to get to learn how to do a > simple thing (last I checked) as read your CD-ROM drive ('swap' comes > to mind, or rather 'mount', unmount). I even bought a book, the Linux > Bible, just to learn how to use Linux (unfortunately I trashed it out > of frustration--I probably should have kept it for any future > reinstall). > The last install I did took under two hours, including the download. The only thing that didn't work immediately was the link to a Windows Mobile PDA. CD and DVD drives have been able to automount if you want that for years. Whisper it quietly, but you can even configure Linux to automatically play an audio CD or DVD movie on insertion. > You're asking me to install Linux for the THIRD time John--once I did > in 1995 or so (dual boot with NT, it did work, but as i recall I had > to actually manually configure the CRT to work at the right > resolution), once in 2007 or 08, and now again? Both times I found it > wanting. You're asking me to spend a week out of my life just so I > can supposedly benefit from virus-free internet surfing, which, EVEN > IF TRUE, is solving a non-existent problem: I've never had a serious > virus (a few false positives) in over 20 years of Windows PC use! > I had trouble getting both Windows and Linux to talk to the monitor in 1995, too. Third time lucky, then. But if it takes you a week to get surfing with Linux on an existing broadband or modem connection, then you're probably beyond help. On average, it takes me under two hours from putting the install medium into the drive to getting a new Linux installation safely connected to the web, and I only need to be near the computer for a few minutes of that time. That's faster than Windows XP, even from a maker's restore medium, mainly because I don't need to install the malware prevention software. As for reinstalling systems, this computer needed three install attempts to get Windows XP running. Linux (Two different distros) worked straight out of the box. Should I have given up, and just ignored Windows for ever? Last time I installed Vista (On a dual core,fast for its day, PC with plenty of RAM.), it took four hours to just get the machine to boot properly with everything working, and another hour or two to get on-line, even with the help of the maker's installation program. Ubuntu 9.10 installed to a second partition on that machine yesterday in an hour, and worked fully straight away, apart from the Windows PDA problem. *And* it dual boots. >> That indeed makes you a fool, and deliberately ignorant, and proves that >> your mind is inflexible and closed to new experiences. >> > > Sh iite yes if it means violation of my being. And frankly, Linux is > violation of my being. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. > So, sunni, when *are* you going to fix Windows? I've just had to download *another* set of patches today, so it ain't fixed yet. The last batch was yesterday. Same for Linux...... -- Tciao for Now! John. |