If you can't answer that you really don't have many clues about linux. Your views so far don't contradict that.
I run spice in wine (now waiting for the punch line). It doesn't make it any more complicated.
NT
they aren't. They get loads of malware, they get to pay techs to fix problems, and pay every time they get a new machine. Feel free to go out & ask people if those are features they want in a computer.
NT
Tim seems unable to accept that not everyone agrees with him. The OP specifically asked about installing Linux.
Tim wades in and tells him about HIS failures with installing Linux to meet the needs of others. He ignores the fact countless people install and use Linux.
What ever you do, don't get him onto the subject of the gunge you can squirt into car tyres.....
I think my abilities with Linux are better than your English comprehension skills. Might just be your left brain showing through. ;-(
Like you have any real understanding of 'my views'.
Good for you?
Of course it does, unless someone else installed WINE and installed Spice in WINE for you? And why happens if WINE goes wrong (you know, that extra complicating layer), will Spice still run ok?
Again, nice try but no cigar. ;-(
Cheers, T i m
Oh the irony!
Cite?
And? I 'install and use Linux'. Your point again?
Why, something else you still don't understand? (Oh, that's another rhetorical question you Left brainers don't get so please don't bother trying to answer).
Cheers, T i m
No initial capitalisation, no final full stop and has a spelling mistake in such a short sentence?
Was it the red mist that stopped you from spotting them or fingers slipping on the drool on your keyboard? ;-)
Cheers, T i m
ah, more bs. Good night.
Strange they aren't all looking for a replacement then? Why are Apple not selling more machines (than the 10% they have been stuck on for years) or Linux doing better than 5% (again, for years)?
And pLease don't give me all that conspiracy theory bs.
'They'? I haven't, the Mrs hasn't, daughter hasn't, in fact, millions of people haven't.
But at least they have the option. Again, how many people have access to the kid next door to fix their Linux machines ... compared with Windows ones?
Because it's often a new version. And exactly how much do they pay for it? How much cheaper can you get a PC for without Windows installed? Answer, even the Linux user-admins know it makes sense to buy a Windows PC and install Linux dual boot.
Bwhaha ... only if you offer to install Linux for them free and pay me £10 when they want Windows back on again!
I have *never* said Windows is perfect or that I'm particularly interested in any OS, it's just that after installing and maintaining OS's for nearly 40 years, I have a reasonable idea of what works for 'most people' and Linux REALLY isn't it.
Well, it's fine in their phone, TV, doorbell, STB, just not on their desktop. Strangely, Linus himself agrees with me ...
Cheers, T i m
Just inject three or four points of sanity into the confusion.
- You can still get 32 bit linux in latest releases.
- linux + desktop will just about run in 256Mytes RAM, is usable at
512MBytes and starts to be friendly at 1GB.- Linux itself is not the problem nor yet is the desktop. Its the apps themselves. Thunderbird here is taking 256Mbyte RAM ON ITS OWN. Libre office calc is around 50-100MB. Firefox is around 200Mbyte. On this freshly booted desktop I am using 1.8GB or RAM for the linux + those apps plus skype plus a reasinable amount of widgets. . Dumping all but thunderbird nets me a shade over 1GB.
- the key elemnst to useabiklity IME are RAM, CPU power, Graphics acceleration and disk speed. You cant do much with a lappie about CPU and graphics - either they will allow you to watch a Flash video (the biggest chewer of CPU+GPU I have encountered outside of real time games) or they wont. RAM should be increase to bet the nmachine can get if you have any spare compatibles lying around,. Often very cheap or free on old machines. SSD disk will make a massive difference and the good news is that you dont need much and it can always be taken out and used in another machine.
- SSD disk is not only very fast to boot, and load programs but more importantly itst very fast to SWAP in and out of - ten times faster than ordinary disk. So a machine equippeed with it that is swapping is far and away more usable than one without.
- Rarhertrhan argue on line, burning the latest 32 bit MInt Mate onto a DVD and booting from it will reveal exactly how fast it will run firefox and Flash, It its unusable, you have lost nothing but a couple of hours and a burnable DVD. If it is usable even with current disk abd RAM, why not install it.
so many electrons but you still haven't managed a reply worth spending any time on.
In message snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net>, Adrian Caspersz snipped-for-privacy@here.invalid writes
The OP is still here :-)
Unfortunately, any thread that dares to mention Linux quickly develops into a Linux v Windows war, swiftly crashing into a general Linux war of versions, programs and more, with doubtless knowledgeable and experienced users all having their say, but leaving the newbies far behind.
TBH, this seems to be a useful, summary, by TNP, in that I understand what is being suggested and, perhaps more importantly, why :
<quote>Just inject three or four points of sanity into the confusion.
- You can still get 32 bit Linux in latest releases.
- Linux + desktop will just about run in 256Mytes RAM, is usable at
512MBytes and starts to be friendly at 1GB.- Linux itself is not the problem nor yet is the desktop. Its the apps themselves. Thunderbird here is taking 256Mbyte RAM ON ITS OWN. Libre office calc is around 50-100MB. Firefox is around 200Mbyte. On this freshly booted desktop I am using 1.8GB or RAM for the Linux + those apps plus Skype plus a reasonable amount of widgets. Dumping all but thunderbird nets me a shade over 1GB.
- the key element to usability IME are RAM, CPU power, Graphics acceleration and disk speed. You can't do much with a lappie about CPU and graphics - either they will allow you to watch a Flash video (the biggest chewer of CPU+GPU I have encountered outside of real time games) or they wont. RAM should be increase to bet the machine can get if you have any spare compatibles lying around,. Often very cheap or free on old machines. SSD disk will make a massive difference and the good news is that you don't need much and it can always be taken out and used in another machine.
- SSD disk is not only very fast to boot, and load programs but more importantly its very fast to SWAP in and out of - ten times faster than ordinary disk. So a machine equipped with it that is swapping is far and away more usable than one without.
- Rather than argue on line, burning the latest 32 bit Mint Mate onto a DVD and booting from it will reveal exactly how fast it will run Firefox and Flash, if its unusable, you have lost nothing but a couple of hours and a burnable DVD. If it is usable even with current disk and RAM, why not install it.
<unquote>
Get yourself something lighter than Mint, eg puppylinux, copy to usb stick, boot from it. See if you like it. If so, install. If not, nothing lost, think again.
Or hey, if you want modernish hardware to run at lightning speed under windows, you can always install win98 :) It does require major-ish patching to run on today's kit, but damn it's fast.
NT
OOI, did Opera work for your Barclays investment issue?
no. If its linux the site barfs, I suspect some toolkit they built it with probes the OS and is only geared to windows and OSX.
The OP has an old machine he wants to use for basic functions.
He doesn?t need to install an SSD etc to do that.
Just a basic Linux which will run fine, be faster that XP, he doesn?t need to worry about XP no longer being supported etc...
Just because YOU can?t make Linux work, don?t assume others can?t.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.