snyper Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Can i run a trial version of linux along with xp? Is there an xp and home version of linux? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AdamF Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 There is no such thing as a 'trial' version of linux, the whole thing is completely free. And the short answer is yes, you can run 2 OS's on the one computer.The longer answer is, it's a dangerous and fairly complicated process (if you don't know what you're doing). An easy way would be to download the free version of VMWare Server, get yourself a free license key, then load linux on there. That way you run linux 'inside' windows. It's not ideal, but if you decide you like it, you can then (try) for a dual-boot system. If it works, cool. If it breaks, well, nevermind, you decided you liked it anyway right? The next question is what distribution of linux do you want? There are hundreds, literally.Personally, I'd recommend Ubuntu for those relatively new to the linux scene. If you feel adventurous, try Kubuntu. The only difference in them is one has the Gnome desktop, the other has KDE. Gnome is a little more user-friendly for the first-timers.Check out their websites, have a read of the docs, the FAQ's, the forums... see what you think. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
snyper Posted November 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Thanks for the great reply Adamf.it's a dangerous and fairly complicated process (if you don't know what you're doing).Thats me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Naming is hard Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 You could always use a live CD, like suggested above, Ubuntu has a very easy to use Live CD, and if you like it, the install will make partitioning your hard drive a snap. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AdamF Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 (edited) The only caution I'll give is that if you use a 'non-standard' install of XP, like 99% of companies do these days, repartitioning could spell the end of Windows actually booting. I've done dual-boots many times on self-installed XP machines without a hitch. I don't mean to sound like a doom-master, but it's a real possibility of data loss. The problems begin on my 'new' desktop that I bought rather than built. It turned out that the boot drive was hidden on what was technically the E: drive, which is also housed the hidden repair partition. When D: was resized to house my linux install, the whole thing went to rats. Not a big problem, as I didn't really want Windows on it anyway, but it would have been nice.What I'm getting at is, if you have a REAL 'Windows XP' install disk with your PC, you'll probably get away with it. If you have a 'Dell Recovery CD', or a 'Compaq Recovery CD' or '<insert company name here> Recovery CD', you may not get away with it so well. In the fight against piracy, as usual, the honest ones suffer as well.No-one NEEDS Windows I've decided. I've been living without it for months now and do fine. Take a backup of all the stuff you want to keep off your machine, then let linux take it over. If you have applications that are only available for Windows, you have 2 options:1. Try running it in Wine. So far I've only come across one or two applications that don't work with Wine that I really liked, the rest work without a hitch. Because Wine runs like any other application on your X desktop, it's like mix-n-match. 2. If you have no joy with Wine, the other alternative is download VMWare Server, get a (free) license key (I have a couple if you can't get them to respond), then install Windows *inside* VMWare on your linux machine. This is a 'real' install of Windows as far as Windows is concerned, but run entirely inside the VMWare emulator. It's a little slower than running it for 'real', but as I only need to boot it to get the pictures off my Nokia phone via PC Suite, I can handle that. You will need a genuine version of the XP Install CD to get it up and running though, so depending on how you got Windows in the first place, it might be an expensive option. And as suggested above, you can (and actually have no choice, with U/Kubuntu), in running the LiveCD to install. But you don't have to install... you can look around instead. The CD contains a fully working, if somewhat limited, version of the linux desktop. It's also painfully slow due to it running entirely from the cd and having no swap space ('paging file'), but it works. If you get good video clarity and audio on boot up, you know it'll work great on your system. Until you actually go through the 'Install' button and answer Yes a couple of times to the "Are you REALLY sure you wanna do this?" dialogs, nothing will change on your hard drive. Pop the CD out, reboot, and it'll be back to Windows.So you have some options, some of them non-permanent. Give it a try Edited November 16, 2006 by AdamF Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tictoc5150 Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 The only difference in them is one has the Gnome desktop, the other has KDE. Gnome is a little more user-friendly for the first-timers.That's a matter of opinion and potentially misleading....I tried Gnome when I first switched over from windows and was not comfortable with it....KDE, in my opinion, is more "Windows-like" and most people switching over should feel a little more at home.and as pointed out, I'd go with a live cd to just check it out....imagine it running a lot faster, having access to considerably more applications and being far more customizable to your needs and that's what it'll be like actually installed to your HD Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AdamF Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 The only difference in them is one has the Gnome desktop, the other has KDE. Gnome is a little more user-friendly for the first-timers.That's a matter of opinion and potentially misleading....I tried Gnome when I first switched over from windows and was not comfortable with it....KDE, in my opinion, is more "Windows-like" and most people switching over should feel a little more at home.Sure user-friendlyness is I guess, a matter of opinion. Whilst KDE is more 'Windows-like', Gnome in my opinion is a lot more friendly. Try both, there's no harm in it. I use KDE, the wife prefers Gnome. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hitest Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 The only difference in them is one has the Gnome desktop, the other has KDE. Gnome is a little more user-friendly for the first-timers.That's a matter of opinion and potentially misleading....I tried Gnome when I first switched over from windows and was not comfortable with it....KDE, in my opinion, is more "Windows-like" and most people switching over should feel a little more at home.Sure user-friendlyness is I guess, a matter of opinion. Whilst KDE is more 'Windows-like', Gnome in my opinion is a lot more friendly. Try both, there's no harm in it. I use KDE, the wife prefers Gnome. I use both KDE and Gnome on my Slackware boxes. Gnome is exceptional, as is KDE. I agree with t0c, I think KDE is more windows-like in appearance and lay-out than Gnome, it has a distinct windows feel to it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
snyper Posted November 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 does the same apply for vista with regarding running it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AdamF Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 does the same apply for vista with regarding running it?Not sure what you mean. If you mean "does it look like Vista?", having never seen it, I've no idea. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
iccaros Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 vista looks a lot like Gnome with the OSX skins.. lots off glossy eat your processor so word runs slower stuff. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AdamF Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 (edited) ooh an OpenBSD fan... eeeeexcellent. Edited November 17, 2006 by AdamF Quote Link to post Share on other sites
snyper Posted November 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Not sure what you mean. If you mean "does it look like Vista?", having never seen it, I've no idea.No. sorry, i mean..see post 1 and replace the word linux with vista Quote Link to post Share on other sites
iccaros Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 you can dual boot any two OS, some are harder than others, if you install XP and then go and install Vista is should set its self up for dual boot. But as we just received the shipping version of VISTA it is impossible to say for sure that it will work this way.you should look into VMWare. you can get VMWARE server for free and with that run any x86 OS you need to under VMWARE.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.