please dont make fun of me

ok so i think i wanna try this linux thing after hearing how much better it is than windows but how does it work and can i play all my games and use all my same programs on it? does it run just like windows or hwo do you run it?

 

In short you can't. You can run some of your Windows programs using WINE (a compatibility layer for running Windows programs) but not games because it doesn't have support for DirectX.

 

aww ok well thx macker

 

I'm not a gamer, but there is some limited support for Windows Direct X gaming under linux. For example, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedega.

Most people who want to play games will probably setup dual-boot, so that you boot into Windows when you want to play games, and boot into Linux for the work that you can do best in that OS.

 

You can run games on Windows, but I wont be running Linux on its own for a while. WINE is great, in fact the only game I can't get running on it is BFME2, all my other games run great. But it is annoying to set up each individual game.

 

As Sylvain said, you can get a number of games running under Wine. For even more game support, you might want to buy Cedega (it costs $5 / month). Cedega is basically wine with some extensions and better support for games. To know what Cedega is, check out: http://www.transgaming.com/products_linux.php For a list of the games supported by Cedega and how well the game plays under Cedega, check out: http://transgaming.org/gamesdb/

My advice if you want to start moving over to Linux is to do the following:

1) Install Qemu on Windows (fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/) and http://www.h7.dion.ne.jp/~qemu-win/
OR
1) Install VMware on your windows machine

2) Now install different Linux distros as guests inside Qemu or VMware. See which distro you like. Start to get familiar with Linux and how Linux works, the apps, etc.

3) Once you're comfortable with running Linux most of the day and if you find that there are apps for most of the things you're interested in, switch. Install Linux on your hard drive (on a different partition) and you can then either dual-boot (boot into Windows when you want an app/game that doesn't run under Linux), or install Qemu / VMware inside Linux and run Windows as a guest (this should work for all apps but not for games). For games, you'd have to dual-boot. That way, if you just need a quick app, you don't have to reset. You can launch Qemu/VMware, run that app in the guest OS, and then shut down Qemu/VMware and continue working.

 

Agree with the other guys, if you simply wanted to use all same programs/games, why bother switching? Obviously the same OS is the best way.

However, I am definitely not saying you should stick to window$, there ain't no vista down the road there. Linux has much more fun and opens up a very different view in front of you!

 

Theres a linux version of most standard windows programs (Word processor, instant message, music player, etc.) but for games you will need to use Wine. I use it without trouble to run most of the games I have. I havent been able to get Rise of Legends or Oblivion to run on it though :-/

 

If you have to ask those questions, I'd recommend you not do Linux, or at least not install it yourself. Get a LiveCD from www.kubuntu.org or something and try it out, see what it's all about, perhaps see if there's a local Linux Users Group in your area that you can go to and see what we smelly geeks like about it firsthand

 

hey! I showered today!

 

Could someone answer me this question. If its such a bother to set up programs on linux etc. then why would anyone bother? Why would anyone bother digging around for compatible programs and have to install something just to get it to run windows games etc. Why not just have windows?

 

Because getting Windows stable is more of a bother.

Getting normal programs to install on Linux is easier than Windows. But - if we want to play games outside of Windows, WINE makes it fairly easy to get a lot of games running. It's just some troublesome games that give us headaches (read: FEAR's evil .NET dependency).

 

Windows isn't that unstable. I think it's a bit of an exaggeration on the part of devoted Linux users. Just a disclaimer to those who are going to flame this post, Linux does seem to be more stable than XP. I experiment alot and have hosed Windows many times and although I grant that they were my fault, so are most of the other cases were users whine about the instability of Windows. Maybe if you stopped visiting questionable websites...jk

 

One thing I'll give to Linux is that it doesn't just magically "break down" over time. On my old laptop a few years ago, I had Redhat or something installed for a long time and it just kept working fine, but I got fed up with the lack of multimedia support at the time.

My parents' XP computer (where I go to play games occasionally) is such a slug now. I hadn't used it in a while and it's gotten worse. Maybe I'm just used to how snappy and responsive my Linux install is. Linux takes longer to "appear ready," but once it's loaded, it's totally loaded, whereas XP still has to churn away for a minute or two before it's good to go.

I'm probably gonna have to go and back everything up and reinstall, but it's just such a PITA.

I will say that the only problems I've had relating to windows XP (besides rooting out spyware/adware, as my dad has a propensity to accept things unthinkingly,) were device-driver related. I've never had an application take the system out totally.

 

In my humble opinion I would say that finding compatible programs kinda depends on the version of Linux you have. For example, you can use Gentoo and just basically type in the name of the program you want - it'll download it and all the dependencies you need - super easy!

The benefits of using Linux over Windows are more than it's more stable. The big one for me is it's free. (Apparently I heard that if windows comes pre-installed on your notebook, there is a process you can go through to get it removed and you get some money back)

The other reason I would suggest using Linux is that you actually learn a hell of a lot about the way a computer system works and in turn you can use this knowledge to make your system run better than it could do in Windows. Another example (again I know I'm sorry I'm not a Gentoo fanboy but it does appear to make good examples) is that when you install Gentoo you can compile the Kernel to your specific set of hardware. What this means is that instead of every time you boot the computer asks, "Who am I. What hardware do I have" (which can take a long time) it loads the specific drivers it needs. This in turn speeds up your boot time and can stop conflicting drivers from messing your system up.

The upside of this is that you have more responsibility if something goes wrong. If you have altered part of the system you shouldn't have, things can go drastically wrong - but there are an army of people willing to help you if you ask nicely .

J

 

I try to make the move to Linux more and more for a few reasons. One reason is the customization and learning that Linux can provide. Another is the stability and security (I don't even run antivirus or anti-spyware on my Linux install, nor do most people). Obviously, another is that it's free. But choice is the major reason.

See, Linux has so many options for so many people. If you want a full-fledged server OS, then you can choose a powerful, lightweight distribution. If you want a desktop OS for your personal computer, you can find one of those. Distributions like Ubuntu and Fedora Core allow you to easily set up and maintain a fully functional desktop OS with loads of support; on the other hand, they also allow you to get as deep into Linux as you want (and alter the way it works) with no fear of violating any EULA or BS like that. Linux is all about freedom and choice, and that's why I like it. I'm not a big fan of having M$ staring down my neck all the time ready to slap me with a lawsuit if I happen to run a program they don't like, install Windows on more than one machine, alter a program or OS in any way, or generally use it in any way they don't see fit. F that nonsense. Sure there are pros and cons to using Linux, but the same can be said vice versa. IMO, the pros of Linux vs. Windows far outweigh the cons. I'll deal with having a few incompatible programs and games if it means I don't have to pay for something I don't like, worry about stupid lawsuits, or be restricted by some license that a company makes because they think they own what you paid for.

 

I like linux for server stuff.
I like windows for games.
I like OS X for everything else.
Though I think my DSL ISP has a firewall that won't let ftp connections through >.< what a buzz kill.

**edit**
yeah, i should mention... I find using linux for a server platform easier for most things compared to 2k3 server. Plus there is a new audio stream program that lets you browse the folders and choose the song, then it will stream it. Something I can't find in windows.

Linux is becoming pretty bloated now though. Boot time with Fedora Core 6 is LONG. I'm sure there are things I can do to make it faster... but I'm not ready to get that deep into linux. I'd rather get everything working, then image it to Parallels to back the whole thing up.

As far as stability, I have to say Linux is generally the most stable OS, but the easiest to hose. OS X is pretty darn stable and pretty difficult to hose. XP... well, XP is very stable now and overall is great, but I hate the workflow. Well, I hate a lot about XP, but it's mostly personal opinion though. So I just use bootcamp/parallels for XP for gaming and Oracle work.

Now that I've discovered Mono, no reason to use XP for Visual studio .Net!

 

Yeah, it's because it loads up a crap load of drivers on boot and THEN chooses which to use. Re-compiling a kernel would go a long ways to reducing boot time, but the average user doesn't know how to do that and would accept a longer boot time over hardware incompatibility.

I'm thinking my next computer will be a Mac. Or I may just install OS X on this when sound drivers and wireless drivers are available. If I buy a Mac, I know I won't be paying a Microsoft tax, and know that I'd get better value for money paying a Leopard tax. Then I would of course put Ubuntu or Arch on it, and keep OS X for the impressing people and playing games.

 

Yeah, I'm just not ready to jump into kernal recompilations. And I'm not sure if it's properly using the drivers. For instance, I don't know if it's really using the ATI drivers.

Heh, good luck trying to install a hacked OS X onto a non Apple machine. I've heard it's pretty hard to do and terribly unstable. And illegal.

I dunno if I would pay the money to buy a mac if I was just going to use it for linux and impress people. Unless it's a mac mini. Those things aren't priced too shabbily and are nice little units. Perfect for running in parallel.

 

I'm pretty certain that my next notebook purchase will be a Mac. Unix-ness with a well-integrated/polished UI and no worries about multimedia appeals. I'll see what the state of Linux is in a couple years, of course, but I like the prospect of literally having everything "just work".

 

Linux is just not ready for the Average person yet. The main problem I have with Linux is ...........

Yes Linux is pretty stable but when a problem does occur, I have no idea how to fix it most of the time.(even when I look it up) Its almost like I can't experiment with Linux without ruining the kernal, making it unbootable and would have to reload the Linux OS.

And I hate that Most Linux OS's forces either GRUB or LILO Bootloader on your Comp. Only about three or four distros that I tried gave me a choice to load Bootloader somewhere besides the mbr, but thats a whole differ story.


But I do like Linux & especially Ubuntu. But isn't Linux suppose to be made small? low recourse usage? low hd space needed? etc: etc:

If so .....then why do we compare to windows?

 

I think that Linux moved from being the Unix alternative to the Windows alternative. It's not really what it was meant to be. When I first used Red Hat like, 8 years ago, it was tiny. Now, it takes gigs. Gnome/KDE take up so much space now.
But, this means that it's easier to use. Installing software is so much easier. It's still not as easy as Windows and no where near as easy as OS X, but it's better than RH5.
I know a few hardcore linux users that won't install Gnome/KDE anymore becuase they're so large. CLI FTW!

 

uh... in Ubuntu, to install a piece of software, I open synaptic, search for the package name, click a checkbox, then the apply button. doesn't get much easier, unless of course I enter a single command in a terminal emulator.

It takes gigs because you get a complete system. For a basic desktop Ubuntu install they recommend about 2GB, and I would say you have pretty much a complete desktop system, legally excluded media codecs notwithstanding.

It loads GRUB or LILO so that it can boot? I don't see the problem, unless you want to put in a boot floppy every time? Any distro worth having will automatically include other operating systems in it's boot list, windows doesn't do that. Besides, removing it is trivial if you want to put the windows bootloader back in.

What on earth are you doing already that you need to change the kernel? Keep in mind that any "instability" is caused by you, and your configuration.

Man, I sound like a total fanboy...

 

Yeah, dunno what's with the kernel issues. Been using Linux for over 12 months and I've never had to touch the kernel.

 

The other thing that I found funny is that you couldn't even touch the kernel under Windows. I'm sure it would fall under the reverse engineering stipulations of the EULA.

 

On size, has anyone been able to install modern m$ windows within 50MB sort of space yet? If you simply wanted small disk space, just try out ****-small-linux, which only occupies 50MB or so of space yet still has graphical interface.

 

I prefer Puppy linux, it has a personal hand built feel about it, and a more robust kernel. Both DSL and Knoppix froze during the boot on a horrible, cheap HP desktop PC that we had at work.

 

You are fortunate that your computer hardware and peripherals are supported by the stock kernel and modules supplied with your distro.

 

Multiple computers and multiple distros, mate.

 

Okay, very fortunate

There are still going to be some people who do have to compile a kernel to get hardware driver support.

In my own case, I've had to recompile the kernel for my Fujitsu P7010D because the genrtc driver was causing the OS to briefly freeze ever minute or two.

I have a PJB-100 portable mp3 player, and its linux driver is supplied as a patch to the kernel source (and as USB support keeps changing you need to keep modifying the driver). It's extremely unlikely that any distro that you have supports the PJB-100 with the stock kernel.