What is Linux good for?

I've already got a lot of stuff for XP, so I'm wondering what some of the more useful aspects of Linux are that XP either can't do or can't do without spending a significant amount of money. I like the idea of free and legal software.

Advantages? Disadvantages? Can Linux read NTFS or do I need a third partition for shared files? How do you keep Linux secure, and what are the current favorites amount security apps?

What about replacements for MS Office (OpenOffice)? Are there any serious compatibility issues? What about MATLAB (which I'd like to use in 64bit world)...it says Linux 2.4.x and glibc 2.2.5 (whatever that is) is required for operation???

Forgive me, but I'm new to the Linux community and I'm still thinking about taking the plunge. At best, I'm dealing with a dual boot setup. I still need XP but I'm curious.

Please, feel free to educate me on anything you feel is necessary for me to know about. Linux is a curiosity for me, and one I want to at least look at.

 

I think one of the greatest helps with linux (and a feature I have not seen available for XP) is Automatix. Its basically a graphical installer which has a log of an enormous variety of apps. For instance if you want virus protection you just fire up Automatix2 and click on the anti virus software icon then hit install and its done. But its not just limited to anti virus software, it has everything from Mplayer to Kino, a video editor. try finding something like that for XP and you will be searching for a while.

As far as compatibility goes I have not had any trouble, for instance I can write a document in MS Word, including pics or graphical features, and then transfer them(using a USB drive) to OpenOffice in Linux (and visa versa) without any issues, everything works. I do have trouble occasionally if I use some really wild font, but that can even be fixed if I download the fonts through Automatix. FireFox is able to download all of the web pages I have been able to through at it and has played all on-line videos. Except for one were they use some weird encoding, not even FF in XP could play it.

Ubuntu has been by far the easiest Linux distro to get working, 6.06LTS to be specific. It recognize all of my hardware right from the start, for instance I was surfing the net while it installed. Plus because Ubuntu is so popular you are guaranteed to have better program options, like Automatix, and a bigger support group.

 

In ultra-quick fashion...

You can have either read-only or read-write access to NTFS partitions with minimal effort. It's not automatic (yet,) but all of the necessary background stuff is available, and there are numerous tutorials available on the internet.

Security: I personally don't run any anti-virus software or spyware because essentially there is none of that stuff "in the wild" for Linux. Even then, the worst that could happen with a virus is that the personal files in your /home directory (basically equivalent to My Documents,) would be affected. The system itself would basically be impervious.

With regards to OpenOffice, it works very well for me, as I mainly just use the Writer component. If you have a lot of custom excel macros or something, those won't work (yet,) and if you have a really fancy table-based layout or something in a document, you might have issues with the formatting. If all else fails, you can directly export a PDF file that anyone with Acrobat can look at.

With MATLAB, any modern distribution will work with it. there's even a GPL equivalent called scilab. I don't know how the two compare, but there's bound to be a comparison if you do a little googling.

Try the quick little quiz on this website ( http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/ ,) it'll give you some suggestions of distributions to check out. I would recommend a "LiveCD" version, which will load a complete system into RAM without touching your HDD. The performance won't be as good as an installed system, but it will give you a chance to check things out.

that wasn't so quick... but yeah.

 

Linux has several advantages, especially in the ease-of-use area. It's easy to find software you need with a distribution like SUSE or Ubuntu, which keep repositories of compatible, installable software.

There's also more open-source software available. For geeky types, it's very tweakable. it's also MUCH easier to repair, because of the modularity of most Linux installs (any component can be fairly easily removed, replaced, rolled back to a previous version, etc).

Linux will read and write NTFS and FAT32, however it's advisable to have a shared data partition anyway...better safe than sorry. There are also ext2/3 drivers for Windows. However, of all these, none of the support is perfect, though Linux support for FAT32 comes close.

If you'd like to get a feel for Linux, grab one of the Ubuntu variants (Ubuntu, Kubuntu, or Xubuntu) and run it off of CD (you can do that with many Linuxes). It's a good in-between step to get comfortable with it before trying an install. These also make pretty good rescue CD, as they have a built-in PartitionMagic clone (parted) and can read files off of the HDD and copy them to USB media or CD-R, as well as doing file-system checks on most file systems. Handy thing to have around...I use them at my data center (the things have built-in drivers for HP SmartArray controllers on Proliants!).

 

oh, as a suggestion, try using the free software equivalents under windows for a while, as they're pretty much identical to when they're in Linux.

 

This is a good point. Several of the most popular Linux applications have been ported to Windows:

OpenOffice
Firefox
Thunderbird
The GIMP (Photo Editor)
GAIM (Multi-protocol instant messenger).

These are just off the top of my head. There are others, but these are the "big" ones.

 

Another thing is the linux vs XP boot time. I put Ubuntu on a older P4 system just to play around with it and the first thing I noticed was about a 57 second boot time compared to 2 minutes with XP.

Overall I would say that Linux is basically something like Mac OSX just a little ruffer around the edges. It has many of the advantages that OSX has and many of the Disadvantages, Like great security but its not able to run all of your Win software. I suppose Linux is a lot more flexible though, since you can run it on any computer, PC or Mac.

 

I use MATLAB in a linux environment regularly. No problems; look and feel are identical to windows version. Of coures, you will need to buy the UNIX version of MATLAB

A free alternative to MATLAB (in addition to scilab mentioned previously) is octave.
http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/
It's very compatible with MATLAB (except some quirks), though slower (like using MATLAB v5). There is also octave-forge which is the eqiuvalent of all of the MATLAB toolboxes you pay extra for.

I think you will find that you can do anything in linux as well or better than in windows, with certain exceptions; gaming being the most obvious, and driver support the next.

 

"Linux has several advantages, especially in the ease-of-use area. It's easy to find software you need with a distribution like SUSE or Ubuntu, which keep repositories of compatible, installable software. "

Are you kidding? Linux is not easy to use, at least not even nearly as easy as XP. Chances are high that after installation you WILL find yourself troubleshooting a device on your computer that the Linux distro considers exotic. Take my experience with Kubuntu for example. Recently I struggled with getting my Atheros wireless card working, you can check the thread yourself. Most of the Linux forums out there are devoted to device troubleshooting.

Overall the SETUP (not installation) of Linux is very tricky. But if you are persistent and very patient, usually your efforts will pay off and by then you will have had so much experience in dabbling with the OS that you will know how to use it. Good luck if you decide to dive in.

 

Well, that is you coming from a Windows background. Think of Windows as one language, and GNU/Linux as another. I grew up speaking English, and Windows. I decided to learn German through highschool, and it was difficult. I decided to learn how to use GNU/Linux as well. It was difficult at first, but now I actually find it easier in some ways than speaking "Windows".

For example, my wireless card would not work in Windows when I installed it. So I decided to download the latest drivers from Intel. I found them, and installed them alright, but the drivers had memory leaks.

Also, when you go to install programs, Windows doesn't bother to tell you about dependencies. When I could finally find out how to download the drivers for my ATi graphics cards (which ATi don't allow Dell machines to download it through the normal methods). And then, when I went to install it, it got half way through the install and then complained that it could not continue because I didn't have ".NET" installed.

There are some ways in which Windows is easier to use (because you grew up using it) and some ways in which GNU/Linux is better. It's a different way of doing things, and you just have to understand that.

 

I like it because of what Sylvain said. I use it as a way to learn more about how to use a computer, how to make them work, and understand the problems. It is fun, and sometimes frustrating, but aren't computers always? I like linux, and I hope that I can learn it well enough to use it permanently at some point.

 

Linux is superior to windows in a lot of ways, and I highly recommend moving over to it. Linux is far more stable - to sum up all its power in a word. It is highly extensible.

OpenOffice does not have any issues reading MS Office files (up until Office 2007, in beta, which uses XML doc formats).

I use Ubuntu (which is based on Debian) and have been only pleased with the move.

 

Tell you what i think. I am on ubuntu 6.10 and the only thing i have found that it cant do that windows can do is games. Ubuntu can also do many more things with your music files and there is so many more free programs out there. I like it. I would reccomend that you dual boot with it though, because i have heard of other peoples problems with some internet sites that require internet explorer.

best of all, ubuntu is free for the download anytime you want it

 

I've never done extensive research into it, but I heard an interesting fact once. That one computer IBM made, (you know, that ONE ) that had somewhere around a teraflop of processing power, used Linux. They gave a statistic like: "The average Windows computer crashes or freezes at least once a week. Because of the number of processors in this machine, if we used Windows, hypothetically it would crash every 3.2 seconds." So they ended up using an on-chip Linux type of thing or something. I have no idea what I just said, but it sounds like Linux is more stable .

 

"There are some ways in which Windows is easier to use (because you grew up using it) and some ways in which GNU/Linux is better. It's a different way of doing things, and you just have to understand that."

That is true, but it's beside the point I made. What I'm saying is that each Linux distro will offer a different set of problems in terms of setup. I had no audio when I was running Mandriva, and now I have no wireless running Kubuntu. As I'm sure you know, troubleshooting Linux is a world apart from troubleshooting Windows whether you have used Windows or not, because the world of open source has a problem with the wonderful concept of standardisation. To troubleshoot Kubuntu, I couldn't get exact instructions b/c only Ubuntu guides were available; this is a problem shared by all the distros and a problem that ultimately prevents even the novice Windows users from using Linux. It's not standardised. Each of the distributions have, for some stupid reason (probably marketing), come up with a catchy name for their program downloader (synaptic, adept, etc) and a slurry of names for various programs, many of which serve a very similar function (kwireless, wireless assistant, knetwork all serve the same purpose and yet are considered to be distinct programs. Why?). I understant that the Linux base even has different command lines. This runaway strategy is a complete disaster and it doesn't look like developers are picking up on this problem.

This chaos and lack of standardisation makes the initial transition for any user, whether that user is switching from Windows or from a foreign Linux distro, quite difficult, and it ends up costing Linux alot of potential users. This is a shame because Linux is really a great OS, an OS that I like so much that I'm going to skip on Vista, and keep Kubuntu or Ubuntu; it is progressing in the areas of the GUI and compatibility, but for the latter they must make steps towards developing a standardised, simplistic system of some sort in order to compete with Microsoft on any level. Of course, those who persevere reap the benefits by enjoying a stable, free OS that is extremely secure and simplistic in terms of maintanence.

 

Hey, bc135. I should say that is the problem for almost every Linux newbie has to go through.

For different distro, different group thought differently and they are facing to solve more important things. Recently, it is good for users having Ubuntu like distro that paticularly facing to desktop users. Eventhough, they are facing to lot of issues like lack of drivers. Only a few of big manufactors release Linux driver, most of small company don't do it. That's why so many third party driver come into Linux world, that's the contribution from fans. Things will get better and better.

Don't expect Linux will catch up new hardwares, it always slower than Windows, but not that slow compare to many years ago.

 

I agree the the fractured approach might be daunting to prospective users, but it is this choice that makes GNU/Linux so good. If you don't like the way a particular network manager runs, you can install another. Even if you don't like the way your terminal looks at you, you can ditch it for another.

If there was a fully standardised (there are some standards in place eg GTK development) then it would certainly limit your choice and would make GNU/Linux a bit unattractive in my opinion. You might get more users in the short term, but would lose some who don't like a "standard" way of doing things.

 

Yea I definitely agree that this is probably the biggest problem with Linux. But it seems like if you stick to one of the main distros (Ubuntu, SUSS Mandriva etc) then there are not as many problems.

I suppose I have been fortunate since the main distros I have mentioned supported all of my hardware out of the box. But when I did have and issue- software related not hardware related-it was not to hard to get the answer from forums like NR's or just by googleing it. The Linux community I have to say is awesome. I have not had a single problem that could not be solved by posting in a few forums combined with a little patience.

Also there have been a few posts by a owner of an Asus A8JS, which is one of the newest notebooks to hit the market, that it has very good supports many linux distros. This is a good sign as it shows that Linux is gaining support for new hardware, an area were it has lacked in the past.

 

Your comments are true. But I'm not just talking about the customization options that Linux offers; they need to offer automatic hardware support akin to Windows if the OS hopes to survive the next few years.

Personally I would love to see developers offer only the bare minimum, that is, the kernel plus hardware drivers to Linux users, and then supply them with one enormous, centralised database of modular programs, services, and components. In this way you have the custom feel of Linux without the confusion and worry of hunting down the correct driver. Such a move would allow Linux to compete very aggressively with MS as both KDE and GNOME present a very nice GUI that might even challenge Vista's Aero (I know I wouldn't pay $250 just for Aero when I can have KDE, a free and satisfying alternative). This brings me to the last bit of my opinion; they need to remove the dependecy on the command line. Since we can assume that most users coming to Linux formerly used Windows, it is safe to say that most of them don't even know five MS-DOS commands since Windows relies strictly on a GUI to interact with the user; you can't expect a user new to an OS already more challenging than Windows to simply open up a Konsole and start typing away commands!

 

I don't really follow here. Linux has better AUTOMATIC hardware support than Windows already. Remember also that Linux devs (usually) don't write the drivers, it's up the the hardware manufacturer. The Linux community can't really help it if a hardware manufacturer doesn't release Linux drivers.

The kernel is what supplies the majority of hardware drivers. Other drivers (such as GPU drivers) are bolt-on.

www.gentoo.org

With programs such as Synaptic, YaST, Automatix, and EasyUbuntu, I know some people who have set up their entire Linux system without opening up a terminal. Command line knowledge is becoming less a prerequistite by the release. To install ATi drivers for example, I can just install it via synaptic's GUI.

 

you have to keep in mind that almost every Linux distribution is technically it's own operating system. Linux itself is simply the kernel, the very core of the OS, and the GNU system are the very basic programs that make the system work, hence GNU/Linux. The things that are added on to the GNU/Linux system create the operating system.

The real difficulty with Linux right now are the drivers, and we are generally dependent on hardware manufacturers either writing the drivers or releasing the information so that people in the community can write them.

The upcoming changes for ubuntu sound good, though. NetworkManager is default, and there are various other things to make stuff "just work". That's the other thing about Linux, development is so rapid because the system is so flexible. Example: the next Ubuntu release, "Fiesty Fawn" 7.04 is due in April, I believe.

 

Ubuntu is supposed to have a new version every 6 months. So, versions are usually 7.04, or 6.10, which indicate the year.month of release. Notice that it was 6.06, because that release was delayed for a while, but they didn't delay the next release.

 

...you know, what you're asking for exists. Install the server version of Ubuntu, and you can do EXACTLY what you propose there. Everything is completely modular, with the module interlinks figured out with the apt packaging system. And you can even install Beryl with KDE, which is more of an analogue to Aero than just KDE is.

But then you go into "expecting a new user to type commands is crazy talk!". I think expecting a user to find some of the crap in dialogs is crazy. You know where you enable remote desktop sharing in Windows? It's not under networking, like you'd think. Like it is under KDE. It's under a right-click menu on My Computer. I go to sounds on the Control Panel in Windows, and I can't change ANYTHING about the sound hardware... I have to go to the device manager for that. Because that's intuitive

Also, hardware support in Linux is LIGHT YEARS ahead of in Windows. If I open my case, stick a new sound card in, and start it back up, Linux will detect it and it'll just work, if Linux supports it AT ALL. Windows? Gotta go find a driver, sometimes on the CD, but you usually have to go out to the Internet to get it, because the drivers on CD are notoriously broken, and need updating. Which you manually have to take care of, making sure your graphics driver and sound drivers are at the latest versions to compensate for the inadequacies of the 3rd party driver development model that Windows is, and many times if you have older hardware, there just aren't drivers for Windows 2000 or XP, much less Vista, so you just have to resign yourself to that hardware not working. Linux? Hell, I have a scanner hooked up to my Kubuntu 6.10 machine that works perfectly fine, and the latest drivers it has from HP are from Win98. Let's see Windows support it.

 

Why on earth would I install the server edition of Ubuntu on my laptop? I'm saying that the need for distros should be eliminated by offering ALL Linux programs in one database, not just a modular version of Linux in the form of Ubuntu Server.

For the hardware support, I really have no idea what you're talking about. I have never had to hunt for drivers for Windows devices, and the OS includes a wizard that hunts them down for you. I own a scanner also, and I never had to use the install CD or go driver-hunting. Windows 98 recognized it right away and got it up and running. Linux is the different story; for all the distros I've tried, audio has failed to work, and so has the wireless and even the video display. You're praising Linux at one of it's weakest points, its hardware support and user integration.

 

@bc135 - I would like to respectfully disagree. If you play around with computers and Windows more, you will know that native driver support is very poor in Windows - as Pita mentioned - and it is a very strong point in most Linux distros.

 

Ok, as to your first paragraph: The problem is your thinking (and this is also the fault of the information out there to some degree). You're thinking of Linux as one homogeneous "thing" but that's wrong. Linux is a product type, like a car or a TV. There are several "brands" of Linux that are similar, and comparable/compatible at a base level. That's the way UNIX always was too. Also the way cars are...an engine from Chevy won't usually work in a Ford, for instance, even though they're both cars.

FOr drivers, yeah, maybe Windows has a wizard that hunts down drivers that Microsoft knows about. Fact is, MICROSFT doesn't write ANY drivers for Windows. Microsoft provides very LITTLE hardware support for Windows. Linux distributions have more BUILT-IN hardware support than Windows, and that's proven fact. All of Microsoft's drivers are provided by a 3rd party. Anyone who provides a Linux driver is automatically made a Linux developer, because they wrote a portion of the kernel (the "driver" module, to be exact).

Now, I don't know what sort of weird hardware you're using, but I DO use some pretty weird hardware, and STILL haven't had trouble getting Linux to work with any of it in many years. Now, if you're talking the Windows 98 era for this scanner...yes, back then Linux hardware detection and support was rotten. Granted. So was Plug and Pray. But things have improved since. Linux has built-in driver support for NVIDIA, ATI, Intel, and SiS graphics, which are the major players. There's also support for S3, and a ton of minor players. Sound support for every AC-97 and up setup out there, every Sound Blaster Creative ever made, most of the Crystal-based cards, and so on. Wireless cards based on anything will work fine except for Broadcom (Something tells me you have a Broadcom) and there's a workaround that lets you use Windows drivers for it (it doesn't work WELL, but it works). SO, exactly which hardware did you have trouble with and when?

 

Yea, most sellers (Dell HP etc) come with the OS already installed so they never experience how difficult XP is to setup. So when they go to install Linux, after never really installing an OS, they think that Linux has poor driver support. Since, after all, XP is more common so it must be easier to get drivers for right? Well No, especially with Vista coming out, they are starting were most distros start. Of course they do have an advantage in that most hardware companys make drivers for Microsoft and only a few for Linux. But you will still have to look long and hard for the drivers for XP, Were as with Linux most are right there in synaptic or whatever package manager your distro uses.

Perhaps something that would help Linux even farther would be to provide a separate CD download that contained all of the drivers that could possibly be needed to setup a distro.

 

I also have to disagree that linux lacks driver support. My favorite computer is a strange conglomeration of parts from all corners of the universe. Every linux distro I've used on that machine has found all the parts on that thing and they work (except for wireless). Right down to some strange sound card from I dont know where (I dont even know what it is anymore, its always labeled as "Sound Module 001" in linux and windows) and a USB wireless card through D-Link. And thats even plugged into a PCI to USB 2.0 adapter. I picked up a couple years back!

Now comes Windows on that machine. Oh Gods protect me! When I had the driver CD's for it (I lost the CD a couple years ago...) I had to use the windows 98 and ME drivers in Windows 2000 and later XP. They did NOT play nice.

Sound drivers: They installed, ran buggy, I updated over and over and finally ran 3rd party hacks to get them running right. Its now a lost cause without the CD. But that gave me an excuse to get a nice creative labs sound card (Which worked under linux without trouble)

Onboard video: kinda buggy constantly but now a lost cause without the CD (Unless you like 640x480 at 16bit colors). I've never used the onboard video unless I have to though. (Linux uses it to its full potential [Which isnt much ])

Wireless adapter: Windows couldnt find a driver. Meh, no biggie, still have CD for it. Had to update driver through D-Links web page though. (In Linux I had to use NDSWrapper to get this working. Thats not a problem though)

PCI to USB hub: Windows didnt like it. Had to track down the drivers myself on VIA's web site now it works flawlessly. Linux didnt have problems from the start.

 

Because Ubuntu server seems to be exactly what you're wanting. It's starts with the base, combined with it's massive Ubuntu repos.

And the need for distros will never be eliminated. Each specific distro caters to a different crowd. If there was only one "distro", someone wouldn't like it, and create their own version. Such is the nature of the GPL. People are free to make it however they like, and it seems the majority like the splintered approach.

 

I want to run the KDE interface, is that possible? How do I do that, through the repositories?

I have had to set up Windows from scratch and I didn't have any problems. I've tried three Linux distros so far and all have failed to recognize my hardware. The most disappointing and recent of all was Kubuntu, there's still the thread mislabelled as "Atheros wireless does work". Check it out and you will see what I mean. It looks like Linux doesn't even support Atheros. Now, seeing as I tried everything, I'm not complaining, but the fact (from my experience) is, Windows suffers less from compatibility issues; everything just works. Remember those Linux forums? The newbie sections are choked with people struggling to get this sound card working, or that wireless card working. I've spent probably about 4/5 hours total on the Atheros issue, and it's still not resolved. Another slap in the face for those of us who like Linux: Windows wouldn't have had this problem in the first place. It's one of the reasons why its on top.

"Ok, as to your first paragraph: The problem is your thinking (and this is also the fault of the information out there to some degree). You're thinking of Linux as one homogeneous "thing" but that's wrong. Linux is a product type, like a car or a TV. There are several "brands" of Linux that are similar, and comparable/compatible at a base level. That's the way UNIX always was too. Also the way cars are...an engine from Chevy won't usually work in a Ford, for instance, even though they're both cars."

No, you have interpreted my thinking. You may have not read my posts carefully. Imagine if a laptop manufacturer boasts having the most customizable machines available for consumers, but offers laptops only pre-customized. That's how the distributions are, as I see it. They're pre-customized "packages" that come with the kernel. To standardise, developers could create a database/repository of programs and other software components so that the confusion of which distro to pick is eliminated and users can decide for themselves. This lack of standardisation adds to the difficulty which many Windows users fail to get past. Another hindrance is Linux's need of a command line in a world where competing OSs are relying on the GUI (Mac OS X, Microsoft's new Aero interface) to make life easier for the user.

 

Ok, other than the Atheros card, you still haven't said what the problem is. To get an Atheros card working, install the "Madwifi" driver package in your Linux distro. This can be found by Googling "Atheros Linux"

To set up KDE in Ubuntu, there's two ways. You can look in Synaptic for the package named "KDE" and install it, or you can type the command "sudo apt-get install kde" It'll take care of the rest of it for you.

 

You actually want to do "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop", which will put in all the other KDE-specific things that come with kubuntu, so you aren't running a completely spartan KDE desktop.

BTW, npaladin2000: kubuntu 6.10 installs and works great on the HGL-30 I'm running it now. Gotta love beryl's nifty effects. Even mac users are jealous.

 

Pitabred has it there. You'll get a better, more useable system going with kubuntu-desktop than with a standard kde-base.

And, I recently installed xgl-snow on my Kubuntu install, it impressed a few people.

 

I haven't messed with beryl yet...good thing I sprung for the BIG HDD...plenty of room to dual-boot. I DO want to try that once I get Windows working...which is taking a day or so. I'm partial to GNOME over KDE though.

Webcam, Fingerprint reader, TPM Chip, and SD reader all work in Ubuntu?

 

Those I haven't tried. Don't have a need for any of them.

and xgl-snow looks neat, but it looks like it'd drive people away rather than entice them

 

It's just one of those nifty show off things to do. Plus, I can say that GNU/Linux supports christmas more than MS.

EDIT: Here's another example of Window's ease of use.

SECOND EDIT: Whoops! Forgot Windows only print screens what it thinks is being displayed, and not the 16 bit goodness my GPU was displaying.

Went to play CoH in my lecture today, got a blue screen. When I hard-restart, this is what I'm presented with. Welcome to the land of 16 bit colour! Going to reinstall my drivers now. (I know the card isn't broken because Kubuntu looks perfect.)

 

I looking for an (K)Ubuntu distro that has the full KDE desktop, with all the eye candy. It doesn't matter if it's Ubuntu or Kubuntu, as long as it has good hardware support and KDE. If anything the wireless must work so I have access to the internet to tackle other problems. It also has to be compatible with an Atheros 5400G wireless card. Believe me, nPaladin, getting the wireless to work is not that easy. Look at the thread "Atheros wireless does work"; Wireless Assistant has a DHCP problem which may be the culprit. MadWifi is already preinstalled with ATI's driver grlx (?) and a sound driver. Linux got it right in that respect but something else is wrong.

Btw, can my IGP run Beryl? Just curious, I'm happy with KDE

 

Radeon 7500's can run Beryl, so if you 9100 beats that (which I think it does) you should be fine.

Also, for the wireless, try this:

1. install the sharutils and the build-essential packages
2. uninstall the restricted-modules package
3. Get old madwifi http://snapshots.madwifi.org/madwifi-old-current.tar.gz
4. untar, make, sudo make install
5. Check to make sure old modules are not loaded and remove if they are.
6. sudo modprobe ath_pci
7. sudo dhclient ath0

Or NdisWrapper is known to work well.

 

Well Windows just crashed again I was so fed up with it that I just reformated the HD right then and there. Which was not smart since I forgot that I had Ubuntu on the HD. Ah well everything is up and working again (Ubuntu that is) I am going to have to get an XP install CD from a frend.

bc135 I have found that Ubuntu 6.06LTS and Elive have the best wireless support of all of the Distros I have tried, so you could give them a try.

 

Yeah, Elive looks fun. I wander howto make that docker in real clean steps. There are so many variations to make OSX docker in linux, Up to now, I don't see anything can compare with even FlyaKite style. Some of them are over killed to me.

Broadcom wireless is still pain in some where. Intel HD audio jack still not working in Ubuntu Edgy. What else? Oh, Twinview is kind of mess for Nvidia driver, or I haven't figure out how to set it up without trouble. Video creation is still handy in old fashion. The pipped encoding/compression get lot of broken when you grab a DV source.

 

I don't think using madwifi-old is a good idea these days, when installing from source using madwifi-ng is much easier.

 

That's just for compatibility issues. You can of course try the latest version.

 

I'd read (but I can't find a reference) that madwifi-old doesn't work with kernels after 2.6.14?

 

I'm not sure if that's the case. I've never used Madwifi before.