- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 67
well i jsut got my free ubuntu 7.10 in the mail so its time to format my 60gb slave drive and see how it is.
about to format my slave drive
- Thread starter Epic(inactive)
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2007
- Messages
- 843
2 questions
ubuntu 7.1?
Slave drive?
ubuntu 7.1?
Slave drive?
G
GreenMonkey
sure, when you have two hard drives, one is the master and the other is the slave. Most of the time, your C: drive is your master and D: is your slave, but that all goes out the window of course if you partition or use RAID (both of which I do heh)
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 67
well i deleted my slave drive so its empty but i havent gotten around to ubuntu installation. im installing because its faster than windows and if i can get steam to work i could still play dod:s
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2007
- Messages
- 843
whats ubuntu?
some kinda harddrive cleaner?
some kinda harddrive cleaner?
G
GreenMonkey
haha thats a funny joke. But seriousely, Ubuntu is the #1 most popular and fastest growing distribution of lunix ever. It didnt even exist untill recently but the user interface is so improved that its easier than ever to switch.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2007
- Messages
- 6,091
its a linux/unix based OS
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 67
yea ubuntu is sweet but i haven't flash player to work properly so im gonna reinstall and start from scratch and see if i can get DoD:S to work.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2007
- Messages
- 48
I heard that Linux is a lot *FASTER* then Windows. But they say that lots of the features from linux are complete copies of Windows Areo. Is this true?
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 67
well linux is really fast compared to windows just because a default windows has like 8 gb of wasted space in it. but idk about aero or whatever.
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2007
- Messages
- 72
[quote1198378398=W|ngsofN|ght]
I heard that Linux is a lot *FASTER* then Windows. But they say that lots of the features from linux are complete copies of Windows Areo. Is this true?
[/quote1198378398]
Copies? haha. no. whoever says that is an idiot.
Anything that comes close to that statement is probably related to Compiz/Compiz Fusion/Beryl's window effects (which is a project for Linux, not Linux itself).
Compiz is able to animate windows similar to other OS's when you open/close windows, etc. Mind you though, compiz has had their own set of animation plugins. When aero was shown publicly, some linux people liked it and made an animation similar to it (and thus committed it into the main animation plugin..)
btw, when it comes to speed, it seems subjective. For me, it's really fast. For others, it's slow. But generally, I think that Linux is faster. Heck, people rave about the fact that they can pretty much install it on older computers without it hitching (of course, there's also the subject of which distro you're using, if you stripped/customized the kernel of unwanted extras to make it faster, which desktop environment you're using [GNOME vs KDE vs XFCE vs ...], etc.)
EDIT: btw, when you compare a linux distro using composited windows (compiz/fusion, beryl, etc) vs. Vista with Aero, linux most definitely wins in speed, hands down... for a bunch of fancy window effects and junk, Compiz (i use Compiz Fusion, a merge of Compiz and Beryl after Beryl forked from the Compiz project) is pretty darn light weight and efficient.
also, getting Source games to work might take a little research/time. I'm able to play older games (cs 1.6, dod 1.3, etc) just fine. I've tried installing Source but the graphics were all screwy. I'll have to try it again with different settings some time...
I heard that Linux is a lot *FASTER* then Windows. But they say that lots of the features from linux are complete copies of Windows Areo. Is this true?
[/quote1198378398]
Copies? haha. no. whoever says that is an idiot.
Anything that comes close to that statement is probably related to Compiz/Compiz Fusion/Beryl's window effects (which is a project for Linux, not Linux itself).
Compiz is able to animate windows similar to other OS's when you open/close windows, etc. Mind you though, compiz has had their own set of animation plugins. When aero was shown publicly, some linux people liked it and made an animation similar to it (and thus committed it into the main animation plugin..)
btw, when it comes to speed, it seems subjective. For me, it's really fast. For others, it's slow. But generally, I think that Linux is faster. Heck, people rave about the fact that they can pretty much install it on older computers without it hitching (of course, there's also the subject of which distro you're using, if you stripped/customized the kernel of unwanted extras to make it faster, which desktop environment you're using [GNOME vs KDE vs XFCE vs ...], etc.)
EDIT: btw, when you compare a linux distro using composited windows (compiz/fusion, beryl, etc) vs. Vista with Aero, linux most definitely wins in speed, hands down... for a bunch of fancy window effects and junk, Compiz (i use Compiz Fusion, a merge of Compiz and Beryl after Beryl forked from the Compiz project) is pretty darn light weight and efficient.
also, getting Source games to work might take a little research/time. I'm able to play older games (cs 1.6, dod 1.3, etc) just fine. I've tried installing Source but the graphics were all screwy. I'll have to try it again with different settings some time...
G
GreenMonkey
Just to repeat what he he started:
To say that windows was copied by linux is like saying that the great quake of 1906 copied the last two digits from 2006. Infact, linux and mac had all of vistas features working before microsoft began development. (unless you factor in that vista has been in development since 2001). The cool thing is that you can get linux to look just liek vista on a laptop that couldnt run vista basic to save its life. They basically do more with less.
As far as 'speed' I find OMGooses statement to be correct, some people fine it to be faster other dont. Forexample, at my college we have a linux lab with redhat and sometimes it takes 10 minutes ot login. We also have labs with suse and windows and they run about the same, and my roomates last semester had ubuntu and it ran quick like a bunny.
Sometimes its hardware, sometimes setup, sometimes distro, what I dont like is the inconsistancy, i mean, at least if you give it a year or two windows runs liek crap on EVERYONES computer equally. haha i made a funny. Actually, I reformatted my windows xp computers every year or every 6 months to keep them running fast.
I have had vista for a year now and its just as fast as the day I got it, so I am very happy with it.
To say that windows was copied by linux is like saying that the great quake of 1906 copied the last two digits from 2006. Infact, linux and mac had all of vistas features working before microsoft began development. (unless you factor in that vista has been in development since 2001). The cool thing is that you can get linux to look just liek vista on a laptop that couldnt run vista basic to save its life. They basically do more with less.
As far as 'speed' I find OMGooses statement to be correct, some people fine it to be faster other dont. Forexample, at my college we have a linux lab with redhat and sometimes it takes 10 minutes ot login. We also have labs with suse and windows and they run about the same, and my roomates last semester had ubuntu and it ran quick like a bunny.
Sometimes its hardware, sometimes setup, sometimes distro, what I dont like is the inconsistancy, i mean, at least if you give it a year or two windows runs liek crap on EVERYONES computer equally. haha i made a funny. Actually, I reformatted my windows xp computers every year or every 6 months to keep them running fast.
I have had vista for a year now and its just as fast as the day I got it, so I am very happy with it.
