Installing Ubuntu on a REALLY old computer
in [Chips]
|
Prev: M766LRT MB with PIII600E Slot 1
Next: AWD64GB
From: Rod Speed on 9 Jul 2006 23:50 Dan N <dan(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote > Rod Speed wrote >> Dan N <dan(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>> bbbl67 <yjkhan(a)gmail.com> wrote >>>>> I just upgraded my brother's computer from Win XP to >>>>> Ubuntu 5.10. It was an unbelievable success! It surprised >>>>> even me how smoothly it went -- didn't need to go into the >>>>> command-line even once. Linux has arrived, it seems. >> Nope, now try accessing NTFS formatted partitions on that. > If Ubuntu Linux hasn't 'arrived' because it doesn't access ntfs, then > by your logic XP hasn't 'arrived' because it can't access ext3. >> Mindlessly silly when XP completely dominates the personal desktop >> and ubuntu has gone out of its way to be useable by Win users. > There are many important things that Linux > needs to do in order to have 'arrived', Yes, and ubuntu has covered most of them quite well. Its currently dropped the ball on completely transparent support for FAT32 and NTFS partitions. > and it's come a long way towards achieving those goals. Yep, particularly with a decent user interface that is very familiar to those coming from Win. True in spades of the entire live CD approach too, not just seen with ubuntu now. > Compatibility with a foreign operating system's files on the > same hard disk is way, way done on the bottom of the list, Only for the fools that dont have a clue about what it will take for linux to arrive for the personal desktop user. > if it's even on the list at all. Corse it is with ubuntu particularly. Its been deliberately designed to be easy to try to see if it suits you and full NTFS and FAT32 support is absolutely essential for that. Its not as if its actually difficult to do either, knoppix does that fine, tho its support for write access to NTFS partitions is pathetic. Thats essential when so many XP systems have nothing but NTFS. > Dual booting is something that is often done when > new users evaluate linux, but it's not a requirement. Its clearly a market that ubuntu is aimed at. > I suggest that you install linux on it's own pc, without windows. > You can then quite easily share windows files over the network. Yes, and it does that rather better than knoppix does too. BUT thats useless for many who need a decent dual boot at least, because linux will never be able to be all things to everyone with personal desktop systems. And even when a particular user has decided that linux has arrived and has decided that they wont be wanting to use XP again, it still hasnt arrived until its got a decent bulletproof system for converting the file system if it doesnt have completely bulletproof NTFS support. Hardly any of the level of user that ubuntu is aimed at will be able to or even want to do that file system conversion manually via DVDs. Those with a clue will certainly be able to image their system to a USB/firewire/eSATA external drive that they normally use for backup, before invoking the file system conversion tho.
From: The little lost angel on 10 Jul 2006 10:04 On 9 Jul 2006 15:23:02 -0700, "YKhan" <yjkhan(a)gmail.com> wrote: >I'm sure you can probably find the >source code for Ffox/Tbird, and make your own Ubuntu 5.10 packages from >it. Otherwise, just upgrade to Ubuntu 6.0. I'll be doing that once I get my current project out of the way. >So far, the only inconvenience I've seen is what Rod Speed has been >talking about, regarding the mounting of the Windows filesystems. <snipped> >they just haven't gotten it working right. So it's >an erratum in a feature, rather than a lack of a feature. The >workaround solution is simple enough, I just run the mount command from >a terminal window. Fortunately for me, I don't usually have to bother with NTFS. The only reason I have a drive with NTFS is simply to deal with the occasional >4GB file like for making DVD backup images. If I migrate entirely to Linux of course that 4GB limit wouldn't be an issue. -- A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations, Lost to the world, Lost to myself
From: Scott Alfter on 10 Jul 2006 14:50 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In article <4hajd4F1qiar5U1(a)individual.net>, Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote: >bbbl67 <yjkhan(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> I just upgraded my brother's computer from Win XP to >> Ubuntu 5.10. It was an unbelievable success! It surprised >> even me how smoothly it went -- didn't need to go into the >> command-line even once. Linux has arrived, it seems. > >Nope, now try accessing NTFS formatted partitions on that. mount -rt ntfs /dev/hda1 /mnt/winxp >Or even just FAT32 partitions. mount -t vfat /dev/hda1 /mnt/winxp (Change "/dev/hda1" and "/mnt/winxp" as needed.) Those are even assuming that there's still an NTFS or FAT partition. It's entirely possible that the drive was nuked and repartitioned with only native-Linux partitions. Even a feeble-minded troll like you should be able to figure that out. _/_ / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail) (IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting! \_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEsqIdVgTKos01OwkRAqqoAKDSUbyOL1SocvFKEdyZRp9octTIQQCgrPae pumPg2X7IeORU+onwinB2wU= =PiZ0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: Scott Alfter on 10 Jul 2006 14:57 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In article <44b09f18.400235218(a)news.singnet.com.sg>, The little lost angel <me> wrote: >On 8 Jul 2006 22:37:35 -0700, "YKhan" <yjkhan(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>Actually, the latest versions of Firefox and Thunderbird are running on >>Ubuntu, but they only seem to be made available on Ubuntu 6.0+. On >>Ubuntu 5.10, Firefox was limited to 1.0.5 or something (didn't try out >>Thunderbird yet at that point), but under Ubuntu 6.06, it's the got the >>latest Firefox and Thunderbird 1.5.0.4. > >I was trying out 5.1 so it came with 1.0.5 which I then attempted to >upgrade to 1.5.04. > >>Digital cameras also work pretty well. > >Never bothered to try that, not even for Windows. I simply use a card >reader. It's just SO much more convenient and hassle free without >having to worry about any potential issues from the different cameras >each of us have. :P Card readers tend to be faster, too, which is an additional bonus. _/_ / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail) (IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting! \_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEsqOmVgTKos01OwkRAkSpAKCRaK49cGA0ds1c3G1FZIVBasbzHQCfYJzP dJz4XAuYUh2ujMBm2NLbBsc= =5P2e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: s. keeling on 10 Jul 2006 17:28
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.] Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com>: > > Irrelevant to his claim that its ARRIVED. It clearly hasnt if it cant > handle that particular situation without the the use of the command line. Ah. Now your true colors come out. Any OS that demands anything be done from a command line is clearly *sooooo last century*! What a fool. The command line is a *feature*! GUIs are useful for doing simple things quickly. They're useless if the GUI doesn't do it the way you want it done. You're the sort of twit who wants an icon to wrap the "pon" command, because clicking an icon is *so much better* than typing three letters at a command line. :-P -- Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (*) http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling Linux Counter #80292 - - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Spammers! http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling/emails.html |