Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.hardware > #1869 > unrolled thread

Can Windows and Linux still coexist?

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.hardware

Contents

  Can Windows and Linux still coexist? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-23 18:40 +0000
    Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2013-06-23 15:10 -0400
    Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-06-23 21:11 +0200
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-23 21:35 +0000
        Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-06-24 07:36 +0200
          Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-24 13:47 +0000
            Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-06-24 21:13 +0000
              Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-25 11:39 +0000
                Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Robert Komar <robk@robpc4.home.org> - 2013-06-27 20:39 -0700
          Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2013-06-24 12:41 -0400
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2013-06-24 08:56 -0800
        Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-06-24 18:11 +0200
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Soupe du Jour <soupedujour2000@gmail.com> - 2013-06-25 12:41 +0000
    Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? David Hough <noone$$@llondel.org> - 2013-06-23 20:18 +0100
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2013-06-23 22:04 +0200
        Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-06-23 22:15 +0100
    Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-06-23 21:23 +0100
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> - 2013-06-23 22:26 +0100
        Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-06-24 00:00 +0100
        Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-06-25 21:02 +0100
          Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2013-06-27 11:05 -0400
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2013-06-23 16:49 -0500
    Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2013-06-24 17:16 +0200
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2013-06-24 12:29 -0400
    Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-07-19 21:56 +0000
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-07-19 17:07 -0500
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-07-19 22:13 +0000
        Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-07-19 22:47 +0000
          Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-07-20 00:08 +0000
            Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-07-20 12:35 +0000
      Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-20 08:16 +0100
        Re: Can Windows and Linux still coexist? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-07-20 12:40 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#1869 — Can Windows and Linux still coexist?

Don't ask!

I may be able to justify buying a new Dell i7 desktop box by claiming
I need (and will actually use) Windows/Office for office
administrative (not network) purposes.  This strictly offline, of
course, not wanting to even remotely allow network access to a M$ OS
box.  Then set up to dual boot linux for secure online use.  This used
to be possible up to XP, but not so sure about newer hardware and M$
OS.  So, here's my specific questions:

* Can you even run W7/Office w/o phoning home (microsoft.com)?  

* Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?

* Is a Dell Inspirion i7 saddled with that secure M$ boot nonsense,
  yet?      

* will linux work on an i7? 

* Do I need grub(2) to boot more than one OS (W7 and a couple linux
  distros).

I'm pretty out of date with respect to hardware.  I got a 12 yr old
P4.  Clue me in.     

nb

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1870

On 06/23/2013 02:40 PM, notbob wrote:
> Don't ask!
> 
> I may be able to justify buying a new Dell i7 desktop box by claiming
> I need (and will actually use) Windows/Office for office
> administrative (not network) purposes.  This strictly offline, of
> course, not wanting to even remotely allow network access to a M$ OS
> box.  Then set up to dual boot linux for secure online use.  This used
> to be possible up to XP, but not so sure about newer hardware and M$
> OS.  So, here's my specific questions:
> 
> * Can you even run W7/Office w/o phoning home (microsoft.com)?  
> 
> * Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?
> 
> * Is a Dell Inspirion i7 saddled with that secure M$ boot nonsense,
>   yet?      
> 
> * will linux work on an i7? 
> 
> * Do I need grub(2) to boot more than one OS (W7 and a couple linux
>   distros).
> 
> I'm pretty out of date with respect to hardware.  I got a 12 yr old
> P4.  Clue me in.     
> 
> nb

I got a Dell Precision T7600 last fall. It has a Four Core XEON E5-2603,
1.8GHz processor in it.

It came with Windows 7 Professional, and I added Red Hat Enterprise
Linux 6 to it. I run mostly the Linux, but use the Windows to update my
Garmin GPS, and to use TaxAct for my income tax.

It boots to Linux with GRUB by default, but if I catch it during the
beginning of the boot, I can make it boot to windows.

I do not know if Windows 7 has a CLI or not; I never looked for it,
because my need for Windows is so small. I suspect it has an MBR. The
boot block looks like this:

# dd bs=512 count=1 if=/dev/sda | od -c
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
512 bytes (512 B) copied, 0.0295088 s, 17.4 kB/s
0000000 353   H 220 320 274  \0   | 216 300 216 330 276  \0   | 277  \0
0000020 006 271  \0 002 374 363 244   P   h 034 006 313 373 271 004  \0
0000040 275 276  \a 200   ~  \0  \0   |  \v 017 205 020 001 203 305 020
0000060 342 361 315 030 210   V  \0   U 306   F 021 005 306   F 003 002
0000100 201  \0  \0 200 350   : 201  \0  \0  \b 372 220 220 366 302 200
0000120   u 002 262 200 352   Y   |  \0  \0   1 300 216 330 216 320 274
0000140  \0     373 240   @   |   < 377   t 002 210 302   R 366 302 200
0000160   t   T 264   A 273 252   U 315 023   Z   R   r   I 201 373   U
0000200 252   u   C 240   A   | 204 300   u 005 203 341 001   t   7   f
0000220 213   L 020 276 005   | 306   D 377 001   f 213 036   D   | 307
0000240 004 020  \0 307   D 002 001  \0   f 211   \  \b 307   D 006  \0
0000260   p   f   1 300 211   D 004   f 211   D  \f 264   B 315 023   r
0000300 005 273  \0   p 353   } 264  \b 315 023   s  \n 366 302 200 017
0000320 204 360  \0 351 215  \0 276 005   | 306   D 377  \0   f   1 300
0000340 210 360   @   f 211   D 004   1 322 210 312 301 342 002 210 350
0000360 210 364   @ 211   D  \b   1 300 210 320 300 350 002   f 211 004
0000400   f 241   D   |   f   1 322   f 367   4 210   T  \n   f   1 322
0000420   f 367   t 004 210   T  \v 211   D  \f   ;   D  \b   }   < 212
0000440   T  \r 300 342 006 212   L  \n 376 301  \b 321 212   l  \f   Z
0000460 212   t  \v 273  \0   p 216 303   1 333 270 001 002 315 023   r
0000500   * 214 303 216 006   H   |   ` 036 271  \0 001 216 333   1 366
0000520   1 377 374 363 245 037   a 377   &   B   | 276 177   } 350   @
0000540  \0 353 016 276 204   } 350   8  \0 353 006 276 216   } 350   0
0000560  \0 276 223   } 350   *  \0 353 376   G   R   U   B      \0   G
0000600   e   o   m  \0   H   a   r   d       D   i   s   k  \0   R   e
0000620   a   d  \0       E   r   r   o   r  \0 273 001  \0 264 016 315
0000640 020 254   <  \0   u 364 303  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0
0000660  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0   e 243 354 374  \0  \0  \0 001
0000700 001  \0 336 004   $   &   $  \0  \0  \0 240 001 001  \0 200 033
0000720 001   +  \a   , 340 264  \0     001  \0  \0   ` 027  \0  \0   ,
0000740 341 264  \a   . 344 377  \0 200 030  \0  \0 300 003 035  \0  \0
0000760  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0  \0   U 252

I do run grub. I do not know if LILO still works. I know there are other
boot loaders, but I know nothing about them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1871

On Sunday 23 June 2013 20:40, notbob conveyed the following to 
comp.os.linux.hardware...

> Don't ask!
> 
> I may be able to justify buying a new Dell i7 desktop box by claiming
> I need (and will actually use) Windows/Office for office
> administrative (not network) purposes.

Hey, it's your computer, but what's wrong with LibreOffice or 
OpenOffice?

> This strictly offline, of course, not wanting to even remotely allow
> network access to a M$ OS box.  Then set up to dual boot linux for
> secure online use.  This used to be possible up to XP, but not so sure
> about newer hardware and M$ OS.  So, here's my specific questions:
> 
> * Can you even run W7/Office w/o phoning home (microsoft.com)?

Yes, but the phoning home is something you will have to disable 
yourself.  I'm not sure on the exact terminology Microsoft uses, but I 
think it's called "Windows user experience program" or something like 
that.

> * Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?

Yes, all Windows versions still do have a command line interface.  I'm 
not sure whether that's the DOS-like CMD.EXE or the new Windows Power 
Shell, but it certainly does have a command line.  Hidden somewhere deep 
in the menus, no doubt. :p

As for MBR, yes, Windows 8 is the first Windows version to demand - if 
the machine is to be delivered with a "designed for Windows" sticker on 
it - UEFI and GPT, even though Windows 8 /can/ still work with MBR and 
BIOS.

Mind you that if you buy a brand new computer, it'll probably have 
Windows 8 on it, not Windows 7.

> * Is a Dell Inspirion i7 saddled with that secure M$ boot nonsense,
>   yet?

This I do not know.  Your guess is as good as mine, but you could check 
on Dell's website whether it has a UEFI.  If it says that it does, or if 
it says that it comes with Windows 8 and it has some sort of Windows 
certification, then it's a UEFI machine and then it does use Secure 
Boot.

> * will linux work on an i7?

Why wouldn't it? :-)

> * Do I need grub(2) to boot more than one OS (W7 and a couple linux
>   distros).

Technically speaking, no, but if you do want to make use of the UEFI - 
in case there is one - in its native mode, then you need a special 
version of the bootloader.  ELILO works with UEFI, and certain versions 
of GRUB also support it.

That said, LILO and GRUB1 can both boot more than one operating system, 
albeit that GRUB is more flexible in that regard than LILO.  But for 
dual-booting between GNU/Linux and Windows, LILO will work.

> I'm pretty out of date with respect to hardware.  I got a 12 yr old
> P4.  Clue me in.

If it's a new machine and it has 4 GiB or more RAM, then you definitely 
want to go for a 64-bit version of your distribution - Slackware, I 
presume. ;-)

-- 
= Aragorn =
  GNU/Linux user #223157 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1877

On 2013-06-23, Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> I may be able to justify buying a new Dell i7 desktop box by claiming
>> I need (and will actually use) Windows/Office for office
>> administrative (not network) purposes.

C'mon Aragorn.  Read the above.

> Mind you that if you buy a brand new computer, it'll probably have 
> Windows 8 on it, not Windows 7.

Dell still delivers W7 machines,
>
> That said, LILO and GRUB1 can both boot more than one operating system, 
> albeit that GRUB is more flexible in that regard than LILO.  But for 
> dual-booting between GNU/Linux and Windows, LILO will work.

That would be nice.  I've never used grub.

> If it's a new machine and it has 4 GiB or more RAM, then you definitely 
> want to go for a 64-bit version of your distribution - Slackware, I 
> presume. ;-)

Is there any doubt!?  The M$ stuff is cuz I need to suddenly interact
with lotta mainstream financial institutions on behalf of my
Alzheimer's mother.  Jes easier and justifies upgrading to TCB on
her behalf.  

nb

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1880

On Sunday 23 June 2013 23:35, notbob conveyed the following to 
comp.os.linux.hardware...

> On 2013-06-23, Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
>
>> That said, LILO and GRUB1 can both boot more than one operating
>> system, albeit that GRUB is more flexible in that regard than LILO. 
>> But for dual-booting between GNU/Linux and Windows, LILO will work.
> 
> That would be nice.  I've never used grub.

GRUB's syntax and method of installing it into the MBR are different 
from the syntax of LILO, but GRUB is more suitable than LILO for if you 
want to boot other UNIX variants.  LILO's only multi-boot capabilities 
depend on using (or faking) an active primary partition.  For Microsoft 
Windows, that would certainly suffice, because Windows does still boot 
via the DOS-style "active primary partition on the first hard disk as 
seen by the BIOS" rule.

GRUB 1 is easy to install, and its major "selling point" at the time was 
that if you edit the configuration file, then you don't have to run a 
command afterwards to update the MBR, since GRUB doesn't use logical 
block offsets like LILO - except for the first stage loader, of course - 
and uses direct filesystem access instead.

GRUB 2 on the other hand is quite a lot more convoluted.  You are now no 
longer supposed to edit the configuration file manually, but instead you 
must how alter other files (under /etc/grub.d) and then run a script 
which will reflect those changes in the actual configuration file.

GRUB 2 also supports ext4 and GPT.  I'm not sure whether GRUB 1 can 
handle GPT, but I do know that an un-patched GRUB 1 does not support 
ext4 for the filesystem /boot resides on.

>> If it's a new machine and it has 4 GiB or more RAM, then you
>> definitely want to go for a 64-bit version of your distribution -
>> Slackware, I presume. ;-)
> 
> Is there any doubt!?  The M$ stuff is cuz I need to suddenly interact
> with lotta mainstream financial institutions on behalf of my
> Alzheimer's mother.

Didn't you just say that you don't intend to connect the Windows 
installation to the internet?

> Jes easier and justifies upgrading to TCB on her behalf.

I'm not sure what you mean by TCB.  "Trusted Computing Base"?

-- 
= Aragorn =
  GNU/Linux user #223157 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1881

On 2013-06-24, Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:


> Didn't you just say that you don't intend to connect the Windows 
> installation to the internet?

Yehbut.... I can do the work and save the files offline, then send 'em
online via linux.  I wouldn't connect to a financial institution
online with Windows on a bet!

>> Jes easier and justifies upgrading to TCB on her behalf.

> I'm not sure what you mean by TCB.  "Trusted Computing Base"?

Must be a youngster.  Take Care of Business.  ;)

Jes less hassle to send Windows based word and excel docs and fill out
court adobe pdfs to necessary legal parties than explain why my LO
docs are a wee bit squirrely.  Normally, I wouldn't give a rat's ass,
but in this case I really need to play it straight.

Plus, I may end up setting myself up to be some sorta geezer
telecommuting support droid, so think I should at least be in touch
with Winblows, even if not actively endorsing it.  That's a maybe.  

I talked to Dell yesterday.  Their hindi dick n' jane wannabes pissed
me off, so I'm gonna fall back on a trusted ol' taiwan centric vendor
outta SV.  I shopped there for yrs before moving to the wilds of CO.
I know they'll give me whatever I desire, no matter how bizarre, and
w/o any static.

nb

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1887

On 24 Jun 2013 13:47:00 GMT, notbob wrote:
> On 2013-06-24, Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>> Didn't you just say that you don't intend to connect the Windows 
>> installation to the internet?
>
> Yehbut.... I can do the work and save the files offline, then send 'em
> online via linux.  I wouldn't connect to a financial institution
> online with Windows on a bet!

I hear that. Only time I use winders is to run TurboTax once a year.
Even then I clone my VirtualBox Win7, install TurboTax cd, get tax
table updates, do my taxes, print the form, copy everything to cd,
exit, delete the VirtualBox clone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1888

On 2013-06-24, Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> I hear that. Only time I use winders is to run TurboTax once a year.
> Even then I clone my VirtualBox Win7, install TurboTax cd, get tax
> table updates, do my taxes, print the form, copy everything to cd,
> exit, delete the VirtualBox clone.

Having never virtual-anythinged, I'm not sure how that works.  Could
you elaborate?  VB creeates a virt clone leaving the original
pristine?  That would be handy.

nb

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1901

notbob <notbob@nothome.com> wrote:
> Having never virtual-anythinged, I'm not sure how that works.  Could
> you elaborate?  VB creeates a virt clone leaving the original
> pristine?  That would be handy.
> 
> nb

It runs as an application inside the host system, like any other
application.  The whole guest OS usually sits inside a single
file on the host.  It's very easy to install, and to remove.

I run a Windows XP guest in VB within my Slackware box for
work.  It works well on the latest multi-cpu systems.
No more dual booting for me.

Rob

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1886

On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Aragorn wrote:


>> Is there any doubt!?  The M$ stuff is cuz I need to suddenly interact
>> with lotta mainstream financial institutions on behalf of my
>> Alzheimer's mother.
>
> Didn't you just say that you don't intend to connect the Windows
> installation to the internet?
>
>> Jes easier and justifies upgrading to TCB on her behalf.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by TCB.  "Trusted Computing Base"?
>
I suspect "Taking Care of Business", but that's a guess.  I seem to recall 
a phrase often used by Elvis, and also a Bachman Turner Overdrive (BTO) 
song.

    Michael

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1883

In article <kq7gv9$mhp$1@dont-email.me>, thorongil@telenet.be.invalid
(Aragorn) writes:

> On Sunday 23 June 2013 20:40, notbob conveyed the following to
> comp.os.linux.hardware...
>
>> * Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?
>
> Yes, all Windows versions still do have a command line interface.
> I'm not sure whether that's the DOS-like CMD.EXE or the new Windows
> Power Shell, but it certainly does have a command line.  Hidden
> somewhere deep in the menus, no doubt. :p

We don't need no steenkin' menus.  Click the Start button, type
"cmd" into the search line, hit <enter>, and viola, a large violin.

Although why anyone would want to run W7 is a mystery to me.
It's one of the most unpleasant experiences I've had on a computer.
Wipe it, install Linux, and install XP under VirtualBox - on my
wife's laptop this worked perfectly, even though the XP install
disk blue-screened if I tried booting it natively.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1884

On Monday 24 June 2013 18:56, Charlie Gibbs conveyed the following to 
comp.os.linux.hardware...

> [...] why anyone would want to run W7 is a mystery to me.

I fully acknowledge that there are people who for some reason cannot do 
without very specific Windows software, and that there are people who 
are forced to use Microsoft Windows at work.

But that said, I am fortunately not one of those people.  I refuse to 
run any version of Microsoft Windows on any of my machines, even though 
I was dumb enough now many years ago to run NT 4.0 for two years.  But 
then again, that was still before I ever had an Internet connection at 
home.

Before NT, I used to run OS/2.  And even back then, what I really wanted 
- not right away, but after a year or two - was UNIX.  However, 
proprietary UNIX was incredibly expensive to come by, so I eventually 
settled on NT 4.0 as a compromise, because coming from OS/2, I did not 
want to run a DOS-based Windows version anymore, and especially not on a 
(then) brand new Pentium II with 128 MiB of RAM.

I discovered GNU/Linux late in 1999, and when I first installed it, it 
was exactly what I had always wanted.  I was also swept away by the GPL 
and comparable Free Software licenses.

I don't need anything else anymore, and no company, organization or 
government is ever going to force me to use Windows.  At least, not on 
my own computers. ;-)

-- 
= Aragorn =
  GNU/Linux user #223157 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1889

On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 21:11:28 +0200, Aragorn wrote:


> 
>> * Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?
> 
> Yes, all Windows versions still do have a command line interface.  I'm
> not sure whether that's the DOS-like CMD.EXE or the new Windows Power
> Shell, but it certainly does have a command line.  Hidden somewhere deep
> in the menus, no doubt. :p

My work laptop with Win 7 has both. They're probably buried in the menus, 
but I normally click the start button and type in "cmd" or "powershell" 
in the search box.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1872

notbob wrote:

> Don't ask!
> 
> I may be able to justify buying a new Dell i7 desktop box by claiming
> I need (and will actually use) Windows/Office for office
> administrative (not network) purposes.  This strictly offline, of
> course, not wanting to even remotely allow network access to a M$ OS
> box.  Then set up to dual boot linux for secure online use.  This used
> to be possible up to XP, but not so sure about newer hardware and M$
> OS.  So, here's my specific questions:
> 
> * Can you even run W7/Office w/o phoning home (microsoft.com)?
> 
> * Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?
> 
> * Is a Dell Inspirion i7 saddled with that secure M$ boot nonsense,
>   yet?
> 
> * will linux work on an i7?
> 
> * Do I need grub(2) to boot more than one OS (W7 and a couple linux
>   distros).
> 
> I'm pretty out of date with respect to hardware.  I got a 12 yr old
> P4.  Clue me in.
> 
Linux runs very well on the i-series CPUs. I'd probably get a decent amount 
of RAM and do a native Linux install, add VirtualBox or other virtual 
machine set-up and then install and run Windows as a virtual machine. That's 
how I run it here and it seems satisfactory. Of course, being a Dell, it'll 
probably come with some difficult-to-modify default Windows install. 

Note that I do allow mine to occasionally talk to the internet so I can't 
help with that question.

Dave

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1873

On 2013-06-23 21:18, David Hough wrote:
[...]
> Linux runs very well on the i-series CPUs. I'd probably get a decent amount 
> of RAM and do a native Linux install, add VirtualBox or other virtual 
> machine set-up and then install and run Windows as a virtual machine. That's 
> how I run it here and it seems satisfactory. Of course, being a Dell, it'll 
> probably come with some difficult-to-modify default Windows install. 

I second this.
The virtual machine approach seems to me
the better one.
Also beacuse no reboot is needed to switch
from one OS to the other.
Furthermore, the network card of VB can be
disabled, so cutting the OS completely off
the internet.

> Note that I do allow mine to occasionally talk to the internet so I can't 
> help with that question.

bye,

-- 

piergiorgio

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1875

On 23/06/13 21:04, Piergiorgio Sartor wrote:
> On 2013-06-23 21:18, David Hough wrote:
> [...]
>> Linux runs very well on the i-series CPUs. I'd probably get a decent amount
>> of RAM and do a native Linux install, add VirtualBox or other virtual
>> machine set-up and then install and run Windows as a virtual machine. That's
>> how I run it here and it seems satisfactory. Of course, being a Dell, it'll
>> probably come with some difficult-to-modify default Windows install.
> I second this.
+1
> The virtual machine approach seems to me
> the better one.
+1
> Also beacuse no reboot is needed to switch
> from one OS to the other.
Although booting windows itself in the VB is just as tedious as booting 
it raw.
I always  'suspend' it to disk. Then I get its RAM back and can boot it 
iin about 10 seconds to where I was, yea even unto being in the middle 
of the same running programs.
If you have oodles of ram, just leave it running


> Furthermore, the network card of VB can be
> disabled, so cutting the OS completely off
> the internet.
Mmm. not ideal as it can then not see any linux data disks.
I suspect, but have never tried, that you can stop it hitting the 
Internet whilst still being able to access your local machines drives 
and indeed the local network - which you might need for printing.

I think you can set it up on its own IP address, and probably firewall 
that out. Or mess with its default route so it does NOT point at your 
internet router. Ot use iptables on the host to achieve similar.

But it is handy to be able to download a few updates direct to windows.



-- 
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1874

In comp.os.linux.misc notbob <notbob@nothome.com> wrote:
> So, here's my specific questions:

> * Can you even run W7/Office w/o phoning home (microsoft.com)?  

You have to confirm the licence for these both. Usually this is done
online but I believe it can still be handled by telephone. Updates are
generally managed online; I don't know how you would deal with these
offline.

Personally, I'm far more chilled about W7 going near the Internet than
I ever used to be for earlier Windows systems. Make sure you have an
uptodate antivirus and you're going to be pretty solidly OK. I can
recommend Avast (free for home, commercial otherwise), Sophos, or ESET. I
actually like its approach to Administrative rights.


> * Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?

Yes. The CLI is called Powershell but don't expect it to act like a
Unix-derived shell; it doesn't. But there's always Cygwin if you're
desperate for a Unix-like shell and utilities.


> * Is a Dell Inspirion i7 saddled with that secure M$ boot nonsense,
>  yet?      

My recollection is that within the EU, the lock-in resulting from secure
boot is only permitted on non-Intel/AMD platforms. I don't know about
countries outside the EU. (I suspect missing the ARM platform was an
oversight, but it means the ARM-based Windows RT is locked down solidly.)


> * Do I need grub(2) to boot more than one OS (W7 and a couple linux
>  distros).

Probably. I *know* it can do this, whereas I have never tried to boot
a non-Windows OS from the Windows boot loader.

Chris

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1876

Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> wrote:

>In comp.os.linux.misc notbob <notbob@nothome.com> wrote:
>> So, here's my specific questions:

>> * Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?
>
> Yes. The CLI is called Powershell but don't expect it to act like a
> Unix-derived shell; it doesn't. But there's always Cygwin if you're
> desperate for a Unix-like shell and utilities.

Powershell isn't the same thing as the more basic cmd.exe command prompt.
Powershell's been available for ages as an optional install, on eg XP.  Are
you saying it's shipped by default with W7?

I can't find anything official that says cmd.exe is no longer present.  

Googling I found plenty of people describing cmd.exe on W7 systems, eg:
http://www.sevenforums.com/general-discussion/227180-cmd-exe.html  

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to newsreplyaaa@wingsandbeaks.org.uk replacing "aaa" by "284".  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1879

Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk>
writes:
> Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In comp.os.linux.misc notbob <notbob@nothome.com> wrote:
>>> So, here's my specific questions:
>
>>> * Does W7 even have a CLI and mbr?
>>
>> Yes. The CLI is called Powershell but don't expect it to act like a
>> Unix-derived shell; it doesn't. But there's always Cygwin if you're
>> desperate for a Unix-like shell and utilities.
>
> Powershell isn't the same thing as the more basic cmd.exe command prompt.
> Powershell's been available for ages as an optional install, on eg XP.  Are
> you saying it's shipped by default with W7?
>
> I can't find anything official that says cmd.exe is no longer present.  

Yes, cmd is still there.

-- 
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1892

In comp.os.linux.hardware Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> wrote:
> Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> wrote:
>> The CLI is called Powershell [...]

> Powershell isn't the same thing as the more basic cmd.exe command prompt.

True. But I've never considered CMD (or its precursor, COMMAND)
sufficiently powerful to be considered a CLI.

Chris

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.hardware

csiph-web