# Is it good to have Linux and XP



## SlipSlice (Jan 1, 2007)

Ok, so my buddy is building me another computer, I should of did it myself but he is doing it for free, all I have to pay for is the parts.

Ok, but he emailed me today, asking me if I want Linux and XP, he said that I could choose on bootup.  He said that it would be good if you knew that you were just going to game or search the internet.  He said Linux would be better for Internet searching, and to log onto XP for gaming? 

Would that be good to have both, and is it true that it is better to keep most gaming files on XP, and others on Linux.

Slip-


----------



## DIBL (Jan 2, 2007)

There is no internet browsing or searching reason to adopt Linux over XP, and your friend is correct that games that are written for Windows will not work real well, or at all, under Linux. If you are happy in Win-world, I would not advocate making the change.

Two cents' worth.


----------



## ghost101 (Jan 2, 2007)

Linux is more secure though?


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Jan 2, 2007)

ghost101 said:


> Linux is more secure though?



Depends on the user. I don't think Linux is suited for someone who doesn't even install it himself.


----------



## Jimmy 2004 (Jan 2, 2007)

ghost101 said:


> Linux is more secure though?



Well, that's sort of a myth anyway. Some studies claim that Linux actually has more flaws, and TBH I think if everyone used Linux that could well be the case. If you secure XP properly with a decent firewall and have antivirus running, don't open any suspicious emails or browse dodgy sites you'll be fine. If a good hacker picks you out and decides that they really want to get into your PC and will do whatever it takes, they'll be able to get passed anything that costs less than a few hundred dollars. Be careful and you're fine, the general hacker is much more interested in the idiot surfing the web without a firewall.


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Jan 2, 2007)

Personally, you don't sound like a linux candidate.  You are used to XP, don't want to install linux, and don't know how things work.  Also, your ATI card + Linux = Trouble.  Linux hates ATI.


----------



## DIBL (Jan 2, 2007)

> your ATI card + Linux = Trouble



LOL -- truer words were never written OR spoken!  I solved that trouble with my checkbook and an Nvidia card!  

My ever-humble opinion -- you REALLY gotta want to escape Win-World, and make like a Linux student for weeks and weeks, before you will find the Linux transition "worth it".  Otherwise, it's just too hard for the average Windows-user.

Remember: Windows is user friendly, but Linux is expert friendly.  No kidding.


----------



## SlipSlice (Jan 3, 2007)

DIBL said:


> LOL -- truer words were never written OR spoken!  I solved that trouble with my checkbook and an Nvidia card!
> 
> My ever-humble opinion -- you REALLY gotta want to escape Win-World, and make like a Linux student for weeks and weeks, before you will find the Linux transition "worth it".  Otherwise, it's just too hard for the average Windows-user.
> 
> Remember: Windows is user friendly, but Linux is expert friendly.  No kidding.





Yea I done called that little deal off, I am just getting XP.  I have heard too much shit about Linux already, and personally don't want to put up with it.  Im saying Windows is perfect niether, but at least I know how to use it!  lol

thanks for the help guys.

slip-


----------



## zekrahminator (Jan 3, 2007)

Another thing, dual booting gets annoying sometimes. Sure it's cool for about a week...and then you get lazy. You just want all your stuff under one boot partition, and to not worry about things. That's how my Vista RC1 experience ended, at least . When Vista actually comes out, I'm getting myself Home Premium, a second hard disk, and enjoying no-extra-drivers-needed RAID.


----------



## Wile E (Jan 3, 2007)

zekrahminator said:


> Another thing, dual booting gets annoying sometimes. Sure it's cool for about a week...and then you get lazy. You just want all your stuff under one boot partition, and to not worry about things. That's how my Vista RC1 experience ended, at least . When Vista actually comes out, I'm getting myself Home Premium, a second hard disk, and enjoying no-extra-drivers-needed RAID.


I agree with you. Dual booting is a PITA, but I really like Linux, so I deal with it.

And what's this about "no-extra-drivers-needed RAID"? Feature of Vista or something? I'd like to know more.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Jan 3, 2007)

Wile E said:


> I agree with you. Dual booting is a PITA, but I really like Linux, so I deal with it.
> 
> And what's this about "no-extra-drivers-needed RAID"? Feature of Vista or something? I'd like to know more.



RAID doesn't need drivers in any OS. Unless you're talking about some software solution. Hardware RAID is completely transparent to the OS. The controller just needs a driver, but non-RAID storage controllers do too.


----------



## Wile E (Jan 3, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> RAID doesn't need drivers in any OS. Unless you're talking about some software solution. Hardware RAID is completely transparent to the OS. The controller just needs a driver, but non-RAID storage controllers do too.


So it was more of a reference to his personal hardware?


----------



## DIBL (Jan 3, 2007)

> Another thing, dual booting gets annoying sometimes



I dove into Linux about 3 months ago -- played with it on a spare hard drive hooked to my old system for the first month to see if I dared make the commitment, and then when I was satisfied it was safe to switch, I built a system just for me (Mom and the kids still have the XP box). I'm down to only 2 reasons to boot the XP partition: (1) to use the Intel OC utilities and tweak my BIOS, and (2) to run Motorola Phone Tools and download stuff from my Razr phone.  Otherwise, everything I need runs on the Linux side, including Open Office for work stuff, Digikam for the pics, and FireFox for internet stuff. I'm pretty sure I'll be real old before I have to buy another Microsoft product, if ever -- MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!


----------



## zekrahminator (Jan 3, 2007)

Wile E said:


> So it was more of a reference to his personal hardware?



Nah, I read an interesting article in PC Magazine (I got a subscription as a Christmas present with my case a year ago, pretty good magazine) about how Vista doesn't need SATA controller drivers. I'll copy-paste it for you guys later if you'd like. But the concept is great, no worrying about floppies or F6 .


----------



## ktr (Jan 3, 2007)

Also Linux has like a 3-5 mins boot up...but it runs pretty fast after that. 


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...368+50001149&Submit=ENE&Nty=1&Subcategory=368

^^^what vista are they packaging with these??? Not bad for 90bucks to have the choice to have select between XP and Vista.


----------



## zekrahminator (Jan 3, 2007)

$90- XP Home means you need to fork $40 over to MS for an upgrade to any version of Vista, at least $70 for the Premium edition, and I dunno how much for business/ultimate. 
$110- XP MCE means you get a free upgrade to Home Basic and Home Premium, and a discounted upgrade to Business and Ultimate. 
$140- XP Pro means you get a free upgrade to Home Basic, Home Premium, and Business. Not sure what the discount is to Ultimate. 

The last two are great deals, assuming you only want an upgrade and not a fresh copy of the OS when you go Vista.


----------



## ktr (Jan 3, 2007)

zekrahminator said:


> $90- XP Home means you need to fork $40 over to MS for an upgrade to any version of Vista, at least $70 for the Premium edition, and I dunno how much for business/ultimate.
> $110- XP MCE means you get a free upgrade to Home Basic and Home Premium, and a discounted upgrade to Business and Ultimate.
> $140- XP Pro means you get a free upgrade to Home Basic, Home Premium, and Business. Not sure what the discount is to Ultimate.
> 
> The last two are great deals, assuming you only want an upgrade and not a fresh copy of the OS when you go Vista.




The last to are a steal then  if you dont install anything and upgrade on that, that pretty much fresh.


----------



## Wile E (Jan 3, 2007)

zekrahminator said:


> Nah, I read an interesting article in PC Magazine (I got a subscription as a Christmas present with my case a year ago, pretty good magazine) about how Vista doesn't need SATA controller drivers. I'll copy-paste it for you guys later if you'd like. But the concept is great, no worrying about floppies or F6 .


Could you? I'm really intrigued by this. That could add at least 1 more pro in going to Vista.


----------



## breakfromyou (Jan 7, 2007)

Linux is pretty nice if you can ever get it doing what you want. That is basically it...I was playing CS:Source earlier through Wine. Running in DX8 at 1024x768, low quality. Guess what kind of FPS I was getting. ~30 

Windows XP does have many advantages over Linux...and to some people, it isn't worth switching. 

Vista: Don't get me started. it's nice...but wow. 1 GB of RAM isn't nearly enough. Boots up pretty quickly, VERY fast installation. It just happens to use up all of your RAM, and it pages more stuff than it puts in physical memory. Microsoft should probably work on that. The only reason I would switch to Vista is because of the DX10 support. Give it a few months, maybe up to a year, and I bet Vista will be much nicer, and easier on the system.


----------



## overcast (Jan 26, 2007)

DIBL said:


> I dove into Linux about 3 months ago -- played with it on a spare hard drive hooked to my old system for the first month to see if I dared make the commitment, and then when I was satisfied it was safe to switch, I built a system just for me (Mom and the kids still have the XP box). I'm down to only 2 reasons to boot the XP partition: (1) to use the Intel OC utilities and tweak my BIOS, and (2) to run Motorola Phone Tools and download stuff from my Razr phone.  Otherwise, everything I need runs on the Linux side, including Open Office for work stuff, Digikam for the pics, and FireFox for internet stuff. I'm pretty sure I'll be real old before I have to buy another Microsoft product, if ever -- MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!


and a lot of people do A LOT more on their computers than those 3 very basic components. Presently, Linux is in no way a replacement for a Windows environment.


----------

