(I call it a short-distance migration because I actually haven't gone anywhere. I'm perhaps migrating from one desktop operating system to another, but I'm still sitting in the same chair, doing the same things, in front of the same keyboard and monitor.)
In recent weeks, I installed Linux Mint, a derivative of Ubuntu, on my main desktop computer. I installed Mint, not as my primary OS, but as a parallel OS to Windows 7. Both OSes are 64-bit. To be clear about this, what I have now is a "dual-boot" machine, one I can boot with either Windows 7 or Mint. The two OSes do not, and will not, run simultaneously.
All along, I've been talking about this move with several people, one of whom is Taxed, our board's IT whizbang, and a diehard Linux freak. He suggested that I chronicle my experiences on the board, both as a way to share with everyone what it's like, and as a way to brainstorm about how to make it all work.
I think Taxed had a good idea, so here I am, here it is, and it's all presented to you by Linux Mint! :tounge:
I'll be adding to this thread as I go through the process. Tomorrow I'll document the initial install process and some of my first impressions. Please check back regularly for additions!
Quote from: TboneAgain on February 22, 2015, 08:19:37 PM
(I call it a short-distance migration because I actually haven't gone anywhere. I'm perhaps migrating from one desktop operating system to another, but I'm still sitting in the same chair, doing the same things, in front of the same keyboard and monitor.)
In recent weeks, I installed Linux Mint, a derivative of Ubuntu, on my main desktop computer. I installed Mint, not as my primary OS, but as a parallel OS to Windows 7. Both OSes are 64-bit. To be clear about this, what I have now is a "dual-boot" machine, one I can boot with either Windows 7 or Mint. The two OSes do not, and will not, run simultaneously.
All along, I've been talking about this move with several people, one of whom is Taxed, our board's IT whizbang, and a diehard Linux freak. He suggested that I chronicle my experiences on the board, both as a way to share with everyone what it's like, and as a way to brainstorm about how to make it all work.
I think Taxed had a good idea, so here I am, here it is, and it's all presented to you by Linux Mint! :tounge:
I'll be adding to this thread as I go through the process. Tomorrow I'll document the initial install process and some of my first impressions. Please check back regularly for additions!
Best of luck T.
Quote from: TboneAgain on February 22, 2015, 08:19:37 PM
(I call it a short-distance migration because I actually haven't gone anywhere. I'm perhaps migrating from one desktop operating system to another, but I'm still sitting in the same chair, doing the same things, in front of the same keyboard and monitor.)
In recent weeks, I installed Linux Mint, a derivative of Ubuntu, on my main desktop computer. I installed Mint, not as my primary OS, but as a parallel OS to Windows 7. Both OSes are 64-bit. To be clear about this, what I have now is a "dual-boot" machine, one I can boot with either Windows 7 or Mint. The two OSes do not, and will not, run simultaneously.
All along, I've been talking about this move with several people, one of whom is Taxed, our board's IT whizbang, and a diehard Linux freak. He suggested that I chronicle my experiences on the board, both as a way to share with everyone what it's like, and as a way to brainstorm about how to make it all work.
I think Taxed had a good idea, so here I am, here it is, and it's all presented to you by Linux Mint! :tounge:
I'll be adding to this thread as I go through the process. Tomorrow I'll document the initial install process and some of my first impressions. Please check back regularly for additions!
Glad you took the dive first.
I too wanted to switch, but haven't found the motivation. Meaning, if I had to move from Win 7 to 8, I was going Linux, because no way in Hell would I ever use a failed product such as win 8, Toy has it, what a headache.
The other reason I haven't switched is download, I'm extremely limited in how many megs I'm allotted.
Quote from: Solar on February 23, 2015, 05:18:17 AM
Glad you took the dive first.
I too wanted to switch, but haven't found the motivation. Meaning, if I had to move from Win 7 to 8, I was going Linux, because no way in Hell would I ever use a failed product such as win 8, Toy has it, what a headache.
The other reason I haven't switched is download, I'm extremely limited in how many megs I'm allotted.
Hmm... can you not do that at a Library in town one day when you have to go in???
Quote from: walkstall on February 23, 2015, 03:33:07 PM
Hmm... can you not do that at a Library in town one day when you have to go in???
I don't think they'd appreciate my 36'' monitor sitting on the table. It's a PC, not a laptop.
Okay, first the basics.
Here's the setup I started with, in terms of hardware.
My system is a home-built, put together from parts and pieces by me around four years ago.
-- Biostar A880GU3 mainboard
-- AMD Athlon II X2 255 Dual Core CPU running at 3100 Mhz
-- 8 GB RAM
-- 1 TB Samsung hard drive
-- NVIDIA GeForce 210 series graphics adapter with 1 GB VRAM
-- Realtek RTL 8168D/8111D PCI-E gigabit ethernet NIC (on the mainboard)
-- Pioneer DVR-219L DVD-RW drive
-- NVIDIA HD Audio adapter (on the mainboard)
-- Logitech M510 wireless mouse
-- Dell AT101W keyboard (yes, it's an antique, but I love my old "clicky" keyboards)
In addition, I use a Canon MF5750 multi-function printer/scanner/copier/fax attached to the system via USB. Also, my "landline" phone is via an original MagicJack, the kind that works through a PC and plugs into a USB port.
When I first put the system together, I loaded Windows XP Pro as the sole operating system. It was what I had been using for years, it was what I was used to, and it was what I had in my hot little hand at the time. Until a couple months ago, that was the system. Note, though, that I ran it with only 4 GB of RAM because my version of Win XP was the 32-bit variety, which won't recognize more than about 4 GB.
Of course, as the months and years went by, things slowed down, as they always do with well-used PCs. And as things slowed down, the internet especially took off like a funny car, demanding ever-increasing bandwidth and processing power. A lot of us have heard of Moore's Law on computing power, but I like to think back on the old "Best Buy Law," which stated that the latest and greatest fire-breathing, gibabyte-spewing, 750-watt monstrosity you just laid down your last two paychecks to own will be obsolete before you can get home from Best Buy.
Upgrade Fever strikes.
My first upgrade, about two months ago, was an OS upgrade, from XP to Windows 7 Ultra 64-bit. That move allowed me to put another 4-gig stick of RAM into the unit. And there are very few things more effective for speeding up an aging PC than wiping the hard drive and starting over. The move from XP to 7 requires that -- a complete wipe of the hard drive -- because there is no upgrade path between them. And the move from 32-bit to 64-bit and from 4 gigs of RAM to 8 gigs was like a shot of nitromethane -- ZOOM!
The first thing I noticed after going from XP to 7 was speed, LOTS more speed, no matter what I was doing. Everything went faster and seemed to work better. The second thing I noticed was a precipitous drop in hard drive activity. When the machine was 4 gig/32-bit, the hard drive worked its ass off managing the Windows swap file and the virtual memory. This Samsung unit is quiet, but I could still hear it, grinding away about 3/4 of the time, especially when I was using a browser. After going to 8 gig/64-bit, it's like a different machine, and the hard drive activity light seldom blinks.
Upgrade #2.
My second upgrade was with Time Warner. Until about six weeks ago, I had subscribed to their basic cable internet service, which was rated at a minimum of 10 Mbps -- sufficient for general browsing and email purposes, but somewhat limited for heavier use, such as streaming video. In a one-person household, it hadn't been much of a problem, though occasionally I'd just turn off a Netflix feed that was choppy or stopped altogether. Regular testing at speakeasy.net (Chicago node) told me I was getting download speeds of more than 10 Mbps, sometimes as high as 16, but usually more like 12. I don't think it was throttled, but I was probably maxing out the el-cheapo Motorola cable modem I'd had for six years.
The TWC upgrade required a new cable modem -- the Arris unit described above. The new service is supposed to be rated at 30 Mbps. At speakeasy.net, I get 34.12 Mbps every single time I test, not 34.13, and not 34.11. Something tells me that TWC has throttled my download speed to 34.12 Mbps. :tounge: Upload speeds are dramatically improved too. I used to be throttled at 980 Kbps; now I'm clocking almost six times that speed -- nearly 6 Mbps. As you can imagine, I'm quite taken with my new experience at the keyboard, and I'm not really out a lot of money -- 40 clams for a "don't ask, don't tell" copy of Windows 7 and about $20/month more on the cable bill.
********************************************
Tomorrow -- How and why I decided to dive into the Linux world, when things were going so swimmingly with Windows.
Quote from: Solar on February 23, 2015, 05:18:17 AM
Glad you took the dive first.
I too wanted to switch, but haven't found the motivation. Meaning, if I had to move from Win 7 to 8, I was going Linux, because no way in Hell would I ever use a failed product such as win 8, Toy has it, what a headache.
The other reason I haven't switched is download, I'm extremely limited in how many megs I'm allotted.
DO NOT EVER "upgrade" from Win 7 to Win 8. You will gain nothing, and lose much.
Microsoft does this shit every now and then. It reminds me of Windows Me, the so-called Millennium Edition. WinMe was Win98 with a bit more lipstick and fancier fingernails. I remember laughing at all the melodramatic
Sturm und Drang, the out-and-out hatred so many people expressed for WinMe, when Me was just 98 with a change of clothes and a new hairdo. Actually, 98 (Me too) was the best DOS-based OS Microsoft ever produced. I used them interchangeably for years.
In a similar sense, Windows 7 is the best thing Microsoft has come up with since XP, and that's saying a lot. It's a very solid, capable OS, well worth the money to migrate away from XP. But Windows 8 (and 8.1) are to Windows 7 as WinMe was to Win98. There's no real difference in capability or functionality, just a lot of lipstick and fingernail-fixing. Worst of all, with Win8, Microsoft essentially abandoned the desktop market for the pads and laptops with touchscreens.
Just what I need -- a computer I can work with my nose, or my big toe, or the head of my.... well, you get the idea. :tounge:
By the way, it's possible, and actually fairly easy, to make a Win8 machine look and work like Win7. (Again, they're essentially the same OS.) Just Google it, and you'll find lots of sites that explain how.
Quote from: TboneAgain on February 23, 2015, 10:11:54 PM
DO NOT EVER "upgrade" from Win 7 to Win 8. You will gain nothing, and lose much.
Microsoft does this shit every now and then. It reminds me of Windows Me, the so-called Millennium Edition. WinMe was Win98 with a bit more lipstick and fancier fingernails. I remember laughing at all the melodramatic Sturm und Drang, the out-and-out hatred so many people expressed for WinMe, when Me was just 98 with a change of clothes and a new hairdo. Actually, 98 (Me too) was the best DOS-based OS Microsoft ever produced. I used them interchangeably for years.
In a similar sense, Windows 7 is the best thing Microsoft has come up with since XP, and that's saying a lot. It's a very solid, capable OS, well worth the money to migrate away from XP. But Windows 8 (and 8.1) are to Windows 7 as WinMe was to Win98. There's no real difference in capability or functionality, just a lot of lipstick and fingernail-fixing. Worst of all, with Win8, Microsoft essentially abandoned the desktop market for the pads and laptops with touchscreens.
Just what I need -- a computer I can work with my nose, or my big toe, or the head of my.... well, you get the idea. :tounge:
By the way, it's possible, and actually fairly easy, to make a Win8 machine look and work like Win7. (Again, they're essentially the same OS.) Just Google it, and you'll find lots of sites that explain how.
If Microsoft (tinypenis) ever brought back Win 98 as it was in Win 98 SE, the PC mkt would be beating down the doors for a copy.
I'd pay top dollar for a new version.
Microsoft is akin to what would happen if Boeing followed the Win format, every passenger jet would be loaded with lowrider hydraulics, every safety feature known to man, including airbags,carbon recapture unit, life raft in every seat, of course there'd be no room for passengers, and the plane would never get off the ground, but that's aside the fact that it's now 100% eco friendly.
Why is it that "Progressives" are actually regressive?
Quote from: Solar on February 24, 2015, 07:53:31 AM
If Microsoft (tinypenis) ever brought back Win 98 as it was in Win 98 SE, the PC mkt would be beating down the doors for a copy.
I'd pay top dollar for a new version.
Microsoft is akin to what would happen if Boeing followed the Win format, every passenger jet would be loaded with lowrider hydraulics, every safety feature known to man, including airbags,carbon recapture unit, life raft in every seat, of course there'd be no room for passengers, and the plane would never get off the ground, but that's aside the fact that it's now 100% eco friendly.
Why is it that "Progressives" are actually regressive?
I was a fan of Win98 Second Edition too. Back then, I had a small shop and I was building and upgrading PCs for people. It reached a point where Microsoft had stopped selling 98 altogether and Me was quite a bit cheaper to buy in the form of OEM CDs, and I bought a bunch of 'em. What a lot of people didn't know back then is that every Me OEM CD had a clean copy of 98SE that could be installed from the root directory. Actually, I'm pretty sure I still have an OEM Win98SE CD around here somewhere.
Ah, there's no going back, and I don't think I'd want to anyway. Back to FAT32? Back to MS-DOS, an OS written with the assumption that no PC would ever have more than 1 MB of RAM? In that day, 98SE was shit hot, and I loved it. But it could never do what we demand to be done now.
About a year ago, I finally got rid of an old Dell PC 80486 system I'd had for years. It was 1993 vintage with matching serial numbers on most of the components, designed for MS-DOS and the early Windows 3.x series. Before I listed it on eBay, I ran it through its paces, and installed some of the best software from the day. It was a hoot playing Wolfenstein 3D and the original Doom on it -- which stretched the system's capabilities to the max -- but my internet setup left something to be desired. There was (is) a DOS-based internet browser called Arachne; thirty seconds using it will break your heart.
The fellow in Canada who bought the system (for a rather handsome sum, I must say) says it's his hobby, collecting such stuff. I think he's probably putting together a computer museum. Whatever....
"Progressives," as you correctly point out, are regressive. They need terminological cover, and they think they've found it in the word 'progressive.' They thought they'd found the same cover with 'liberal,' until they tore that one to pieces. A more correct label, one such people will never adopt, is 'statist.' 'Authoritarian' is actually not far off, and 'fascist.' There's also 'socialist' and 'communist,' though the tread is mostly gone off 'em.
What we have to remember, and project, is that, no matter what clever term the Left may choose to use today, it's always a lie. It has to be, because Leftism withers and dies in the light of truth. They were 'progressives' back in Wilson's time too; they had to abandon the word when it became so obvious that they were the exact opposite of progressive. They migrated to 'liberal,' a move that highlighted the robber heart of the movement -- stealing a label from the moderate Right. Again, after a few decades, it was so obvious that the so-called liberals were anything but, they had to change it again. Having given it a rest for about forty years, and with no one else interested in the moniker, they've lit on 'progressive' again. Whatever. It's all lies, start to finish. It has to be lies, or no one anywhere would vote for them.
Quote from: TboneAgain on February 24, 2015, 01:57:54 PM
I was a fan of Win98 Second Edition too. Back then, I had a small shop and I was building and upgrading PCs for people. It reached a point where Microsoft had stopped selling 98 altogether and Me was quite a bit cheaper to buy in the form of OEM CDs, and I bought a bunch of 'em. What a lot of people didn't know back then is that every Me OEM CD had a clean copy of 98SE that could be installed from the root directory. Actually, I'm pretty sure I still have an OEM Win98SE CD around here somewhere.
Ah, there's no going back, and I don't think I'd want to anyway. Back to FAT32? Back to MS-DOS, an OS written with the assumption that no PC would ever have more than 1 MB of RAM? In that day, 98SE was shit hot, and I loved it. But it could never do what we demand to be done now.
About a year ago, I finally got rid of an old Dell PC 80486 system I'd had for years. It was 1993 vintage with matching serial numbers on most of the components, designed for MS-DOS and the early Windows 3.x series. Before I listed it on eBay, I ran it through its paces, and installed some of the best software from the day. It was a hoot playing Wolfenstein 3D and the original Doom on it -- which stretched the system's capabilities to the max -- but my internet setup left something to be desired. There was (is) a DOS-based internet browser called Arachne; thirty seconds using it will break your heart.
The fellow in Canada who bought the system (for a rather handsome sum, I must say) says it's his hobby, collecting such stuff. I think he's probably putting together a computer museum. Whatever....
"Progressives," as you correctly point out, are regressive. They need terminological cover, and they think they've found it in the word 'progressive.' They thought they'd found the same cover with 'liberal,' until they tore that one to pieces. A more correct label, one such people will never adopt, is 'statist.' 'Authoritarian' is actually not far off, and 'fascist.' There's also 'socialist' and 'communist,' though the tread is mostly gone off 'em.
What we have to remember, and project, is that, no matter what clever term the Left may choose to use today, it's always a lie. It has to be, because Leftism withers and dies in the light of truth. They were 'progressives' back in Wilson's time too; they had to abandon the word when it became so obvious that they were the exact opposite of progressive. They migrated to 'liberal,' a move that highlighted the robber heart of the movement -- stealing a label from the moderate Right. Again, after a few decades, it was so obvious that the so-called liberals were anything but, they had to change it again. Having given it a rest for about forty years, and with no one else interested in the moniker, they've lit on 'progressive' again. Whatever. It's all lies, start to finish. It has to be lies, or no one anywhere would vote for them.
I've no doubt Microsoft could take the basics of Win 98 and make it 64 bit in a heart beat.
Point is, it was simple to navigate compared to, as you appropriately described, lipstick and nail polish BS.
The bare bones is all most people use anyway. Lie me, all I do is the forum and video games, don't care about apps and crap.
But not to go off topic. I finally updated my video card DLL's and suddenly Wolfenstein popped right up.
Wolfenstein: The New Order. I loaded it up and the first puzzle keeps killing me.
Grab the wire cutters and bailing wire, open the fuel port, and.....
I die as son as I crouch and enter. I can't open the floor plate, so I get about 15 seconds and I'm dead.
How do you open that damned floor plate? :biggrin:
Maybe I should open keyboard shortcuts and see what key is used to execute tasks, I assumed it was the E key, like all games, am I right?
THE BIG MOVE TO LINUX: How and Why I Made My Move Toward an Open Source OS
I admit that I've been sorta toying and tinkering with Linux for a lot of years. I know enough about Unix and computer history in general to have an appreciation for its role, especially in managing what has become the modern internet. I've always had a nagging desire to throw off the Microsoft shackles and frolic through fields of fresh springtime flowers created by unpaid open source toilers slaving over keyboards in small dark rooms. :tounge: Also, I always thought the very concept of a free OS was some pretty cool shit. Having been in the PC business for some years, I don't think I'd care to consider how many tens of thousands of dollars I've sent Bill Gates' way.
The Windows dynasty has to be admired in some ways, I think. If for nothing else, Microsoft has to be applauded for its relative unity of purpose and its leadership capabilities. Even with the alternatives available, Windows still accounts for more than 80% of PC users, and that series of OSes has dictated the rise and fall of hardware standards as much as it has software. (For just one example, Apple liked Firewire and Microsoft liked USB. How many Firewire ports does your current PC have?) In general, I think there's something to be said for uniformity, especially in the PC world, where things can be chaotic indeed. (Anybody else remember the multimedia wars of the early 1990s?) I once owned a Commodore 64, when lots of my best friends owned Apples and TIs and Ataris and TRS-80s. We didn't have networking parties, and we never shared software, because those proprietary systems couldn't work together. There is something to be said for a unifying presence.
On the other hand, there's something to be said for competition and innovation in every field of endeavor, and designing OSes is no different. The early designers of Unix recognized early on that the future of computing was networking, and their work reflected it. Linus Torvalds, in taming and domesticating Unix into Linux, also kept networking front and center. That is why, while Bill Gates and company were floundering around with MS-DOS and Windows 95, the internet was being built with Unix and Linux as its backbone. In that field, Windows has been playing catch-up for over twenty years.
I see Linux as being a user-based endeavor, whereas Windows is a consumer-based endeavor. That may sound like a distinction without a difference, but it's not. Computer users know who they are; everybody else with a computer is a consumer. Linux is meant primarily for people who want to accomplish something with a PC. Windows is better for folks who want to have fun playing with somebody else's software, and that includes your aging mother and your grand-nephew with the rainbow-colored razor cut. I'm not saying that one approach or the other is better, just that the approaches are different.
At my age (I turned 60 last month), and with my background in computers, it may seem that I'd be looking to migrate from Linux to Windows. Yet here I am, moving in exactly the opposite direction. Since I lost Mrs. Tbone back in 2013, a lot of things in my life haven't fit into any accepted pattern. Maybe this is just one of those things. :smile:
The Initial Install
There are lots of different versions of Linux to choose from these days. Most are based on Debian Linux, but there are plenty of other variations. In the past, I've played around with RedHat Linux and variations like Linspire and Xandros. This time, I picked Linux Mint. I based my decision on online reviews and the considerable influence of our own CPF IT guru and unrepentant Linux freak, Taxed. (Yeah, go ahead and take your bow now, big boy.) Mint is of the Debian/Ubuntu family tree, for those of you familiar with the Linux tribe. Specifically, I downloaded Linux Mint 17.1 "Cinnamon."
**************************
Tomorrow -- How to successfully download and install Linux Mint as a parallel OS on a Windows machine.
IT'S EASIER THAN YOU THINK.
Downloading the Mint OS software is, as that Russian guy Yakov Smirnov used to say, a piece of pie, and easy as cake. Just go to the site (http://www.linuxmint.com/download.php) and get it.
Once you've got it, you need to create a bit-for-bit copy of it for installation. What you want is the .iso version of the software. Once you've got that, you want to burn the .iso to a disc or some other mountable (bootable) media. Once you've done that, you're ready to install Mint. You can read all about how to do those things here (http://www.linuxmint.com/documentation/user-guide/Cinnamon/english_17.1.pdf).
Once I had my bootable disc, I shut down my Windows system and rebooted, with the Mint bootable disc in the DVD drive. I don't have screen shots to show you, but what I saw was an offer to run Mint from the DVD, to install Mint from the DVD as a second or parallel system, or to install Mint as the one-and-only OS on the machine. Option 3 means everything on the hard drive -- including Windows 7 or whatever other OS you might have -- disappears; I wasn't ready for that. Option 1 is just sorta silly. I chose Option 2, which allowed me, with guidance, to re-partition my 1-TB hard drive into two roughly equal virtual drives (your computer doesn't know there is another kind) each with plenty of room. My Win7 had half a terabyte to romp around in, and so did my spiffy new Mint OS.
To say that the install was painless is... overstating? I think I pained Mint more than it pained me. I had to answer some very basic questions -- name, rank, serial number, except you don't have to provide the rank or the serial number -- and it was off to the races. Mint installed flawlessly, and detected and properly supported all the internal components of my system. The install was literally one of the easiest software installs I've ever encountered.
It took some time, but as I watched, the Mint installer re-partitioned and partially re-formatted my hard drive. It carved out a 500 GB (or so) territory for itself and installed itself on that turf.
When all was said and done, and the smoke cleared somewhat, I was left with a 'dual-boot' machine. When I hit the power switch to turn this monster on, I have to choose -- will it be Windows 7 (completely and perfectly preserved, as far as I can tell) or the rude and base Linux cur, the ugly mutt hiding in the shadows of Microsoft? Hehehehehe....
TOMORROW: Now it's installed. Where do we go from here?
Good thread TBone. Thanks for starting it.
Good stuff T! I think this thread will get some eyeballs...
Quote from: taxed on February 27, 2015, 05:00:32 PM
Good stuff T! I think this thread will get some eyeballs...
STOP! talking over my head. :lol: :lol: :lol:
OK, Linux is installed... NOW WHAT?
An operating system is software that literally tells the separate components of your computer how to interact with one another. Without an OS, the video adapter can't talk to the CPU, which can't communicate with the NIC, which can't get through to the hard drive, which won't speak to anything else, and nothing happens. Without an OS, my tower unit is essentially a 20-pound doorstop. The OS brings order to chaos, and usually serves to harbor other software programs and files that are written to maximize the performance of all the components.
These days, it is generally expected that an OS will power everything up, install the necessary drivers for individual parts and pieces, perform a number of system checks, and present the user with an interface that allows access to whatever else there may be in the system. It makes my mouse work, my keyboard respond, my hard drive to save or read data, my NIC to connect to the network and stand ready. In other words, an OS takes care of automatically booting up the system, though it can be modified to do a great many other things besides that.
Now I have two ways of getting my computer to do all that stuff, and my computer asks me, a few seconds after I hit the power switch, which way I want to go. The Linux Mint install created this menu and Mint is the default selection -- if I do nothing, Mint will take over the boot automatically without my input. If I want to run Win7, I must manually select Win7 using the keyboard.
What Is Linux Mint Like?
It's pretty much like Windows, actually. It does pretty much the same things. Mint loads and boots the system a bit faster than Win7 does, I think, though I haven't actually timed them. (There are differences that would render a side-by-side timer test irrelevant -- more on that later.) When the desktop appears, I'm ready to use my computer in pretty much the same manner and doing pretty much the same things as I had been doing with Win7. Selecting and activating applications -- clicking and double-clicking -- is the same as the Windows routine.
The desktop itself is quite clean and neat, very simple, no flowers or birds singing. Just business. A new install gives you a plain gray screen with the Mint logo displayed in the center. It shows just two icons -- Computer and [User]'s Home. Computer is pretty much the same as "My Computer" in Win -- the gateway to all your non-volatile storage, including hard drives, optical drives, removable drives, floppies, etc. The Home icon gives you the equivalent of the "My Stuff" or "My Files" or "My Documents" in Win.
The real guts are down in the bottom left corner, the "Menu" button. Clicking on that brings up a very well-organized menu of application software and utilities. It is frankly SCADS better than anything a bare Win7 install offers. This is your gateway to the generous suite of software that is included automatically (and free) with Linux Mint.
Mint comes bundled with lots of cool stuff. Firefox to get you on the internet. Thunderbird to help you manage your email (I already use this in Win7.). Transmission is a bit-torrent client. Pidgin is a universal IM manager for your AIM or YM account. GIMP is a marvelously-powerful image management and manipulation suite, the freebie equivalent of PhotoShop (Again, I already use this in Win7.). LibreOffice is a full-featured productivity suite, including word processing, database, spreadsheet, presentation, and other applications, all able to read and write MS Office files. Banshee is an excellent media player and manager, and Brasero helps you burn DVDs and CDs. In addition there are dozens of productivity and system management apps at the touch of your finger. There is really very little to miss about Win7 in terms of startup stuff.
Next: Using Linux Mint, The Experience
USING LINUX MINT -- THE EXPERIENCE
As I stated in my last post, using Linux Mint is pretty much like using Windows, as far as mouse-clicking and so on. But there are clear and obvious differences that are immediately apparent, and some that take a while to show themselves.
Some Stuff Won't Work -- At Least Not Yet
MagicJack
I've had a MagicJack phone number -- my so-called 'land-line' -- for a good many years, since at least 2008. The original MagicJack appliance (I still have mine) was designed to plug into a PC or Mac via USB, and the PC or Mac had to have a high-speed internet connection. Also, the PC had to be running Windows XP or later, and the Mac had to be running OS 10.4.4 or later with an Intel processor. The original MagicJack has never been Linux-compatible, and still isn't. This is not likely to change.
What has changed over the years is that MagicJack is now available in a different hardware/firmware version that doesn't need a PC or Mac or any other computer to work. It plugs -- via standard RJ45 cable or USB port -- into a cable modem/router or standard network router. In some situations, that sort of connectivity could be a distinct drawback -- for example, when staying in a motel that offers only wi-fi internet, as most do, or in any other situation where wireless internet is the only thing available. (Consider that one of the advantages of the MagicJack appliance I have now is that it will work anywhere my laptop can get high-speed internet, whether by wired connection or wireless.)
For the purpose of providing continued service on my existing phone number, upgrading to one of the newer MagicJack appliances offers a partial solution to the problem. It would mean that my MagicJack service works without the PC -- actually outside it altogether. That means I can run Linux Mint and still use MagicJack. But it would also mean that the rather spiffy on-screen phone interface and the extremely handy phone directory I have now would vanish. In addition, I would be out the cash -- I don't know how much yet -- to buy the new MagicJack appliance.
I'll be doing more research into this matter, and I'll update this thread as I get more information.
Multi-Function Printer
For several years now I've been using a Canon MF5750 multi-function printer/scanner/copier/fax that I picked up cheap at a small office closeout sale in Columbus. I LOVE THIS MACHINE. It's a B/W laser output, and I swear the first page is spitting out in less than 5 seconds -- it is the fastest time-to-first-page laser printer I've ever used. The top document feeder is a little iffy, and the copy function tends to make lighter copies than I'd like, but all in all, I dig it.
Trouble is, it won't work in Linux Mint.
Canon is, by the claims of many I've seen online, loath to acknowledge that Linux even exists, much less that Linux users might try to use Canon products. Based on my own research, Canon offers Linux-tailored drivers and software packages for absolutely nothing they manufacture. Canon does direct users of certain of their products to one of a small group of generic drivers for Linux PCs, but of course, my MF5750 ain't in that category.
My printer won't print, and my fax won't fax. My copier works like always, but it doesn't require the PC for that. Oddly enough, Simple Scan, a program included with Mint's graphics suite, will run the scanner part of my multi-function machine. But I can't get the rest of it to go, not even to print out a test page. So at this point, when I'm running Linux, my MF5750 is essentially a large, heavy, toner-laden scanner. I guess that's better than no scanner at all.
One workaround I've considered to restore the fax function is to install a cheap fax modem in the PC and find a cheap or free bit of software that would allow me to fax images scanned by the MF5750. (Actually, Win7 contains precisely such a fax program, but I don't think Mint does.) But that workaround doesn't get me a functional printer.
NEXT: More Gripes and Lots of Praise
Quote from: walkstall on February 27, 2015, 05:18:52 PM
STOP! talking over my head. :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
T, this is really good! I like that you thought the install was a breeze. This was not the case, as of just a couple years ago.
Quote from: taxed on March 02, 2015, 03:28:17 AM
T, this is really good! I like that you thought the install was a breeze. This was not the case, as of just a couple years ago.
I'm glad one of us is having fun. :tounge:
As I mentioned somewhere, this ain't my first go-around with Linux. I'm painfully aware that earlier versions were much less user-friendly. But that's OK. Things are so much better now. :smile:
Linux Mint was such a breeze... I just sorta sat there and watched it all happen. Even with the re-partitioning and partial reformatting of the hard drive, it didn't take that long, and my inputs were few and far between.
HOWEVER, experience with previous Linux flavors tells me that I may have simply gotten lucky. Hardware compatibility, as you know, is a killer problem with most versions of Linux, simply because hardware makers often don't purposely design their stuff to work with Linux. I've been in situations before where Linux just wouldn't do this or run that, period. (I'm kinda there now with MagicJack and my printer.)
Uh, BTW, any advice you might offer about that printer would be good. Did you see the part where I explained that -- of all things -- the scanner part works? It was actually detected automatically by SimpleScan, and I didn't even know it until I went poking around in the menus. Were I a betting man, the scanner part would be the LAST part I'd bet would work. :tounge:
But don't get too excited yet. I have a bit more downside to describe in my next installment. Stick with me, bro. And thank you for all your help.
MORE GRIPES -- AND LOTS OF PRAISE
Before I get started, I want everyone to know that I'm composing these posts via Linux Mint. It's not a foreign language -- quite -- and it works an awful lot like Windows does. It is actually a comfortable place to be.
Problems with software
Linux Mint -- or any version of Linux, for that matter -- won't run Windows-based software without a lot of help, and sometimes not even WITH a lot of help. Linux is a different OS from Windows. They do not share the same architecture, the same code, even the same file structure. You would not expect your Windows applications to run on your MacBook; you should likewise not expect your Windows applications to run on your Linux Mint machine.
In my situation, I had the advantage of being reasonably familiar with open-source software before I took the Linux Mint plunge. Google Chrome, for example, and its ruder cousin, Iron, are essentially open-source browsers. OpenOffice has been my go-to productivity suite for ten years at least. I switched to Thunderbird for minding my email after Outlook pissed me off for the last time. So moving from Windows to Linux, in a number of aspects, isn't like moving at all. Those programs run in Linux just as they do in Windows. (Did I say that backwards? Should it be 'in Windows just as they do in Linux?')
Netflix works fine, as do most video purveyors. Youtube works too. I don't have Amazon Prime, so I can't answer for that one. CPF seems to function quite nicely too!
Here's a short description of things that just don't work in Linux that I've discovered so far...
Windows Games
If you have a library of Windows-based games, they will not work on your Linux-based machine. (This is one reason I went with the dual-boot setup!) Disk-based games, forget 'em.
As far as "online" games go, it depends very much if they're really "online" games, or just downloaded. For example, I have had an account with Big Fish Games for many years, and have purchased and downloaded more than thirty of their games, most for my grandbabies -- none of them, as far as I can tell, will run under Linux Mint. Keep in mind, though, that browser-based games -- and there are thousands out there -- work just fine. That is, I can still get my Sudoku fix at USAToday via Linux, just as I have via Windows for years.
Spotify
There are two ways to get Spotify music: through the web-based interface, and through the downloadable app, which is a shit-hot bit of software! There is not a Linux-compatible version of the app. The web-based Spotify interface does work.
Putting off the praise...
:tounge: NOT what I want to do, but.... mah fangers is gettin' tard. There is praise, and it is forthcoming. I like Linux Mint (Oh shit, did I just give everything away?). Stick with me, kids. You'll get all I have to offer, and we can hope you'll get an insight into what it's like in the world of Linus Torvalds.... Or do we really need to go there?
So many questions.....
Tune in for the next installment! I'm not even gonna name it. Too much pressure. I might call it Steve. Or Larry....
CONCLUSION -- WHERE THINGS STAND NOW
Linux Mint is now my favored OS for everyday functions. Until I get my new MagicJack appliance, I'll have to boot up Win7 from time to time, and if I need the full features of my printer, I have to go there. But the rest of the time, I'm a Linux Mint fan.
Mint is faster, lighter, and cleaner in just about every way I can measure or describe. It shaves 10-15 seconds off my boot time; it accesses files faster; it allows me to navigate from page to page on the web considerably faster -- no need to measure that. You'd have to be comatose not to see the difference. I do NOT get faster download speeds -- I've tested enough to know. But I DO get noticeably faster movement from web page to web page. Using Google Chrome (I'm still working on Iron in this OS), Mint is just plain faster and better.
More than any other single difference, I have to make note of the hard drive activity between the two systems. When I converted from XP 32-bit with 4 GB of RAM to Win7 64-bit with 8 GB RAM, my hard drive activity level and intensity dropped like crazy. This is most likely a response to a much lower need to access things like virtual memory and Windows swap files. But when I booted into Mint, things got deathly quiet. At first, I thought my hard drive had failed, simply because it wasn't doing anything. After a while, I realized that Mint would NEVER tax my hard drive the way Windows had always done.
By maintaining a dual-boot system, Win7 is always available to me, when I have a need to do what only it can do. But those needs are few and, I hope, becoming fewer as I receive my new MagicJack appliance and replace my old MF5750. Once those things are done, we're really only talking about losing out on Windows games. Being not much of a gamer, I think I'll probably survive that loss in good condition.
On the down side, Linux Mint, and Linux in general, is years -- maybe decades -- behind Microsoft in making its software user-friendly. For example, I have been able to locate files on the internet that may (or may not) allow me to use my Canon MF5750 printer. While I've been easily able to download those files, I have no idea what to do with them, and NOBODY I can find can instruct me. Those who are familiar with Windows know that a click or two is all it takes. Linux doesn't yet have that sort of universal install routine. Making use of the printer files I downloaded would require some pretty in-depth programming capabilities. I actually was a programmer back in the day, but no more, and almost no one today has that sort of skill. Despite having in my possession files that I think would enable my printer to work with Linux Mint, I don't have the knowledge or skills to install those files.
The one great selling point for Windows vs. Linux -- installing software on a Windows machine, in almost every case, is easier than falling off a log. Installing Linux software can range from fairly easy at best to cast-iron bitch to utterly impossible without the personal intervention of Linus Torvalds. I don't think anyone involved with Linux (there are many thousands) had it in mind to make the system difficult to navigate. I think it just happened, probably because no one ever spent five seconds thinking about how difficult it is to navigate, or how to make it easier to navigate. "User-friendly" would probably not appear on a top-ten list of desirable traits for a Linux development office.
Outside the macro-framework of Linux Mint -- as one example -- Linux is a motherfucker. It is Geek City. It is, very much, a foreign language to English speakers. I once dabbled in languages like Fortran and BASIC and MS-DOS, which were different, yet all essentially English-based. Linux is not English-based, though it intrudes on the English language for some of its terms. For the average educated English speaker, Linux is, at first blush, gibberish. It remains exactly that through the second, third, and even fourth blushes.
I have nothing against those who work with and in Linux every day. I just want to be clear that doing so requires mastery of a language utterly foreign to the one I'm using right now.
QUESTIONS? COMMENTS?
I'm still in the early stages of adapting to Linux Mint, after being a Windows slave for more years than I'd care to number. Throw your questions at me, and I'll try to answer them as best I can.
Thanks T, in depth, and well done. :thumbup:
Maybe I can get Walks to make your post appear in order of posts, or simply create a new thread with only your posts in succession.
I see this thread becoming extremely popular over the years as a go to, for those searchingg for info on the topic.
Watch the "Views" count continue to climb on a regular basis.
Quote from: Solar on March 05, 2015, 08:18:05 AM
Thanks T, in depth, and well done. :thumbup:
Maybe I can get Walks to make your post appear in order of posts, or simply create a new thread with only your posts in succession.
I see this thread becoming extremely popular over the years as a go to, for those searchingg for info on the topic.
Watch the "Views" count continue to climb on a regular basis.
I can not do that as all posts are time stamped. If I make a new thread it would be under my name not T.
T could start a new post and do a copy paste in the new one. But then people would just post in it also. We could lock it after he did a copy and past. Then when he added to this one we could do a copy and past into the locked one and keep that one clean. The locked one would not let people ask questions or make comments.
Quote from: walkstall on March 05, 2015, 08:44:24 AM
I can not do that as all posts are time stamped.
If I make a new thread it would be under my name not T.
T could start a new post and do a copy paste in the new one. But then people would just post in it also. We could lock it after he did a copy and past. Then when he added to this one we could do a copy and past into the locked one and keep that one clean. The locked one would not let people ask questions or make comments.
Maybe T will create it and propagate his material over to it.
I see no need to lock it, but we can sticky it for a month or so.
Quote from: Solar on March 05, 2015, 09:34:44 AM
Maybe T will create it and propagate his material over to it.
I see no need to lock it, but we can sticky it for a month or so.
I'll get right on it. I'd rather you guys didn't lock it, as I'd like to add to it from time to time, as my experience with Mint accumulates.
Quote from: TboneAgain on March 05, 2015, 10:39:18 AM
I'll get right on it. I'd rather you guys didn't lock it, as I'd like to add to it from time to time, as my experience with Mint accumulates.
If someone posts in it I can move there post over to the first one, that way it will stay clean.
Quote from: walkstall on March 05, 2015, 10:46:59 AM
If someone posts in it I can move there post over to the first one, that way it will stay clean.
The whole thing is in the Library, posted in one big blob, in chronological order. You may do with it what you will. :tounge:
I see that youse guys figured out how you wanted it... sorta. :tounge:
I have a few comments about what I guess I should call appearances -- meaning the appearance of Linux Mint on my screen.
It's different. Rounder, sorta. A touch softer, less crisp.
I double-checked to make sure the correct video drivers were installed. They weren't. The systems installs a generic NVIDIA driver by default. But I changed that, thinking it would make a difference. Nope, not really.
One thing I discovered is that Mint does not use the same array of fonts that Win7 -- or any other version of Windows -- uses. For more than a quarter of a century, I've been dealing with text presented in Times New Roman or Arial or Verdana. Those fonts are not included with Mint, and other fonts are substituted in their place. Of course, that affects almost exclusively my display. For instance, I'm typing this right now under Linux Mint, which is showing me some strange font on my screen, but it looks exactly the same to you as all my other posts. It takes a bit of getting used to. Overall, I'd say that Mint tends to display all text at the same size or smaller than my experience under Win7. I set Chrome's default text size to "large" to compensate, and I'm glad I did.
Colored menu bars are different colors, compared to Win7. Responses are slightly different. EXAMPLE: In Win7, running Google Chrome and Thunderbird, if I click on a link in an email through T'bird, my screen jumps instantly to Chrome and shows me the linked page. In Mint, the same thing happens, sorta, except when I click on the link, I'm left looking at the email. The switch from T'bird to Chrome doesn't happen. Chrome opens a new tab and displays the linked page, but the system doesn't automatically take me to Chrome. It leaves me looking at my email. To see the linked page, I have to manually switch to Chrome. This is obviously a minor annoyance, and it may be a setting I can change, I dunno.
In general, there's no doubt that my system runs more efficiently under Mint. When I'm not mousing or typing, the hard drive activity light almost never comes on. That's not the case with Win7. Web surfing seems faster, not because my download speeds changed (they didn't, I checked) but because switching from page to page seems to go faster. Right now I don't have an app to measure resource usage that can compare Mint to Win; I'm working on that. My gut says resource usage is considerably lower with Mint.
I'll post more as time goes by and I gain experience.
Quote from: TboneAgain on March 12, 2015, 10:26:48 PM
One thing I discovered is that Mint does not use the same array of fonts that Win7 -- or any other version of Windows -- uses. For more than a quarter of a century, I've been dealing with text presented in Times New Roman or Arial or Verdana. Those fonts are not included with Mint, and other fonts are substituted in their place. Of course, that affects almost exclusively my display. For instance, I'm typing this right now under Linux Mint, which is showing me some strange font on my screen, but it looks exactly the same to you as all my other posts. It takes a bit of getting used to. Overall, I'd say that Mint tends to display all text at the same size or smaller than my experience under Win7. I set Chrome's default text size to "large" to compensate, and I'm glad I did.
Yeah they are. Open your Font Manager. If it's not installed, go to your software center and download it. Once you install it, you'll see all your fonts.
To set your default desktop font, just go to Settings -> Appearance.
Quote
Colored menu bars are different colors, compared to Win7. Responses are slightly different. EXAMPLE: In Win7, running Google Chrome and Thunderbird, if I click on a link in an email through T'bird, my screen jumps instantly to Chrome and shows me the linked page. In Mint, the same thing happens, sorta, except when I click on the link, I'm left looking at the email. The switch from T'bird to Chrome doesn't happen. Chrome opens a new tab and displays the linked page, but the system doesn't automatically take me to Chrome. It leaves me looking at my email. To see the linked page, I have to manually switch to Chrome. This is obviously a minor annoyance, and it may be a setting I can change, I dunno.
Yeah, you just need to set it. I have my links set to open in Opera.