If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/12/19 1:28 AM, Paul wrote:
MikeÂ*wasÂ*referringÂ*toÂ*"trial"Â*ofÂ*aÂ*LiveDVDÂ *withoutÂ*installation. YouÂ*can'tÂ*trialÂ*everyÂ*possibleÂ*thingÂ*fromÂ*a Â*LiveDVD,Â*unless youÂ*setÂ*upÂ*aÂ*persistentÂ*store.Â*ThisÂ*isÂ*typ icallyÂ*doneÂ*on LiveDVDsÂ*transferredÂ*toÂ*USBÂ*sticks The purpose of the Live DVD/USB is to demonstrate the desktop and some programs. It is not intended to be a full install of everything. |
Ads |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/12/19 1:48 AM, T wrote:
On 3/12/19 1:28 AM, Paul wrote: MikeÂ*wasÂ*referringÂ*toÂ*"trial"Â*ofÂ*aÂ*LiveDVD *withoutÂ*installation. YouÂ*can'tÂ*trialÂ*everyÂ*possibleÂ*thingÂ*fromÂ*a Â*LiveDVD,Â*unless youÂ*setÂ*upÂ*aÂ*persistentÂ*store. True and an art form in its own. ThisÂ*isÂ*typicallyÂ*doneÂ*on LiveDVDsÂ*transferredÂ*toÂ*USBÂ*sticks,Â*whereÂ*a *4GBÂ*persistence fileÂ*("casper-rw")Â*isÂ*addedÂ*toÂ*theÂ*USBÂ*key,Â*soÂ*thatÂ*mor e extensiveÂ*proceduresÂ*canÂ*beÂ*tried.Â*SuchÂ*asÂ* installingÂ*the NVidiaÂ*graphicsÂ*driver,Â*tryingÂ*VirtualBoxÂ*or *VMPlayer. NotÂ*everyoneÂ*hasÂ*scratchÂ*drivesÂ*forÂ*installi ngÂ*LinuxÂ*forÂ*testing. IÂ*haveÂ*aÂ*tonÂ*ofÂ*drives,Â*andÂ*youÂ*canÂ*never Â*reallyÂ*haveÂ*enough drivesÂ*forÂ*thisÂ*sortÂ*ofÂ*testing.Â*ForÂ*exampl e,Â*rightÂ*now,Â*when I'mÂ*finishedÂ*withÂ*theÂ*500GBÂ*HDDÂ*inÂ*theÂ*Tes tÂ*Machine,Â*IÂ*have toÂ*restoreÂ*fromÂ*backup,Â*toÂ*putÂ*theÂ*previous Â*experimentÂ*back onÂ*there. But a lot of us have Flash drives kicking around.Â* And you can install to them and test whatever you want. The best flash drive for this I have found are from Samsung. No troubles with massive small file transfers.Â* Patriot are the worst. Install from a Live USB to a Sumsung flash drive in a USB 3.1/C jack and it will give Windows a run for its money performance wise. I have actually had them go faster in some customer's machines. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/11/2019 9:55 PM, T wrote:
On 3/10/19 1:10 PM, Mike wrote: you can fly before your buy. That'sÂ*aÂ*myth. If you install from the Live USB's installer, you get the same exact thing as was on the Live stick.Â* Everything that worked with the stick will work installed. There is only one exception I have come across.Â* RHEL does not work natively with C236 chipsets, but will work with the Live USB because it is SLOWER and the problem is a timing issue.Â* And RHEL won't fix unless you pay them to. So, you agree that there are instances where the live differs from the installed. Two problems I've encountered most often are when the installed display comes up blank, and when the LAN doesn't work and you have to search the web for the driver that you need to search the web. Since both worked from the live version, the required drivers are there. It's just that nobody cared to inform the OS upon installation. A mere mortal can't figger out how to fix it. The onion of linux is riddled with stuff like this. No oversight leads to stuff not seen. |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/11/2019 10:15 PM, T wrote:
On 3/10/19 1:10 PM, Mike wrote: ExperimentÂ*two: GiveÂ*twoÂ*peopleÂ*computersÂ*newÂ*inÂ*theÂ*boxÂ*a ndÂ*internetÂ*connections. LockÂ*'emÂ*inÂ*separateÂ*rooms. TellÂ*'emÂ*toÂ*writeÂ*aÂ*shortÂ*memo,Â*attachÂ*aÂ* pictureÂ*andÂ*emailÂ*itÂ*toÂ*you andÂ*you'llÂ*comeÂ*openÂ*theÂ*door. TellÂ*personÂ*twoÂ*thatÂ*heÂ*willÂ*haveÂ*toÂ*useÂ* linuxÂ*toÂ*doÂ*it. LeaveÂ*andÂ*waitÂ*forÂ*theÂ*emails.Â*Â*Don'tÂ*forg etÂ*toÂ*notifyÂ*next ofÂ*kinÂ*andÂ*callÂ*hazmatÂ*forÂ*theÂ*secondÂ*guy. I get paid all the time to set up Windows computers for customers so they can use them.Â* Without me they are completely lost. So lets redo your test with a good consultant setting up the computers for them: Install system-config-printer, Firefox, Libreoffice, Thunderbird, Brave on both computers first with desktop icon.Â* Then repeat the test. Tell them to set up their eMail in Thunderbird, write a letter, set up a printer, look something up on Google. Hmmm.Â* Linux is 40% faster, so Linux would win. I'm on record saying that desktop linux is a great option when a guru builds an APPLIANCE that contains all the capability that the user will ever need...and updates don't break it. If I could do that for myself, I'd kick Windows to the curb in an instant. I'm no fan of windows, but I don't see a VIABLE option. And I've been trying forever. |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/11/2019 10:20 PM, T wrote:
Not to be too blunt, but technically speaking, Windows is s***. This is what happens when the marketing department runs a company. Fortunately, there are was to cope with Windows if you are stuck having to run it for lack of Linux apps We're in heated agreement on that. The experiment is simple. Build a dual boot system with linux and windows. Set default boot to linux. Run linux until you can't do something. The metric is something YOU can't do easily via a GUI, not something that a guru might cobble together. At that point, set the default boot to windows and continue on. When you run into something that you can't do with windows, but could do easily without a guru helping in linux. At that point, set the default boot back to linux. Flip back an forth as required to do all your stuff. I've done that experiment many times. It usually takes less than a day to flip back to windows. I need to go back to linux...well...never. It's not at all whether linux is technically superior. It's about what the user can get done so he can get on with other stuff in his life. You can bitch about the marketing department all you want. Fact is that's the way the world works. Get on board, or swim upstream. Most of us stick with the devil we know. There is no viable alternative on the desktop. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/11/2019 11:39 PM, T wrote:
So, I have no idea what you are not seeing.Â* All can say is that Live USB's are suppose to be demonstrations so you an hands on play with them. Very true. I don't recall any distro that didn't do that. But it's a hollow promise if the installed version boots to a blank screen. |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/12/2019 2:21 AM, T wrote:
Install from a Live USB to a Sumsung flash drive in a USB 3.1/C jack and it will give Windows a run for its money performance wise. I have actually had them go faster in some customer's machines. I've done this with external USB hard drives but have concerns about thumb drives. Does the installer identify a flash drive and configure itself to be gentle with the writes to flash? Does the Samsung USB flash have any internal help like wear leveling? |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
T wrote:
On 3/12/19 1:48 AM, T wrote: On 3/12/19 1:28 AM, Paul wrote: Mike was referring to "trial" of a LiveDVD without installation. You can't trial every possible thing from a LiveDVD, unless you set up a persistent store. True and an art form in its own. This is typically done on LiveDVDs transferred to USB sticks, where a 4GB persistence file ("casper-rw") is added to the USB key, so that more extensive procedures can be tried. Such as installing the NVidia graphics driver, trying VirtualBox or VMPlayer. Not everyone has scratch drives for installing Linux for testing. I have a ton of drives, and you can never really have enough drives for this sort of testing. For example, right now, when I'm finished with the 500GB HDD in the Test Machine, I have to restore from backup, to put the previous experiment back on there. But a lot of us have Flash drives kicking around. And you can install to them and test whatever you want. The best flash drive for this I have found are from Samsung. No troubles with massive small file transfers. Patriot are the worst. Install from a Live USB to a Sumsung flash drive in a USB 3.1/C jack and it will give Windows a run for its money performance wise. I have actually had them go faster in some customer's machines. This is bad advice. I've ruined two USB keys doing exactly that. No more USB keys will be used here for either persistent store or for install as slash. When the first one failed, I pretended it was a fluke. When the second one failed not too much longer after that, I stopped pretending. If it needs storage, it goes on a HDD. One of the scratch HDDs (I probably have five or six 500GB ones for this, some are scratch because of the danger they might fail). Even the ones with a few reallocations showing, haven't actually died on me yet. The flash keys that failed, were TLC based, because I opened up the sticks and looked up the chip numbers in Google. If you have a stick old enough to be based on MLC or SLC, that's probably safe for installation purposes, just because there are more write cycles available (even if the technology doesn't have effective wear leveling). If I had proof that the USB flash stick had as good wear leveling as an SSD does, I wouldn't be nearly as concerned. But the way these sticks fails, suggests there is little in the way of wear leveling there. And it could be all too easy to "burn a hole" in one as a result. The sticks behaved slowly at first (write rate drops to 1.5 to 3MB/sec), and it isn't that much later before the thing disappears completely. ******* And newer sticks are getting worse. I bought a Sandisk Extreme maybe a year and a half ago, and it has worked consistently. I liked it enough, to look for such a stick at the computer store a couple weeks ago. The model number had changed, as you would expect. I brought the stick home, and read speed was 50MB/sec. That is hardly Extreme. I tried using "dd", and did "dd if=/dev/urandom" and used a random bit pattern to write the stick from end to end. After that, a read test gave a more uniform 150MB/sec on read. So the root cause of the initial terrible performance, is "mushy TLC" syndrome. This is where every sector on the stick, when you get it, has errors requiring ECC correction inside the stick. This causes the read rate to drop, because the microcontroller inside the chip does the correction in firmware. There isn't a dedicated hardware block for error correction. TLC is bad enough, they might use 50 bytes of overhead for every 512 bytes of data. And the poor microcontroller then has to work out which bits in the just-read block need to be flipped. I'm expecting if I leave data on the new stick, then three months from now the read rate will have dropped to 50MB/sec again. The question then is, how long before the 512 byte block is "uncorrectable". The 50 byte number is assumed to be powerful enough for a certain error rate over time. And the "mushy" behavior isn't supposed to lead to data loss. But how warm and fuzzy do I feel about this... Hmmm. I have other USB sticks that are slow but consistent. I might not have a problem using those, but because they're slow, the experience wouldn't be all that pleasant. Nobody enjoys consistent 3MB/sec write rates (a couple of them had that speed from day one). If you got some good USB sticks, then great... I fully recommend my OCZ RALLY2 8GB, which is bulletproof (at least compared to the pile of TLC rubbish sitting on my desk right now). I probably bought that eight or ten years ago. That would be a good candidate for an install. But I only own one of those (it had a mail in rebate, one per household). Paul |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
"T" wrote
| Not politics. Economics. Code Weavers makes their living | off of consulting services. They don't give anything | away for free. My experience with them is very negative. | You find a bug, even in their documentation (I found some | really bad ones in their installation instructions), they | start name calling and on and on and so forth. | | Wine Staging is finally fixing things. | This is all just red herrings. Code Weavers is a commercial WINE wrapper. Wine Staging, according to their own webpage, is optional beta features that can be installed early. None of that has anything to do with the basic problem that WINE isn't a dependable option for Windows software on Linux and that, in fact, the entire design of WINE is deeply flawed. They act like teenagers trying to hack specific Windows programs, rather than creating a cross-platform API system that Windows programmers can target. They can never have a finished product, by design. | If you like way Windows does things, stick with Windows. | The P is PC stands for Personal. The problem is that you keep actively trying to sell Linux to people. Your answer is always that people should try a Linux CD. Computer problems? Dry skin? Losing crops to drought? Wife doesn't orgasm? Your answer to everything is Linux. Enthusiasm is fine but you're also providing misinformation. * You answered my complaint about firewalls without actually knowing the answer. * When I point out problems with WINE you go off on unrelated tangents about Code Weavers. * You claim Windows lacks backward compatibility. When I ask for examples all you can name is Quicken. Yet Quicken officially supports Win7-10 and when asked to explain the problem you don't answer. That's 9 years of compatibility. There are some gaps, and changes happen. Networking changed fundamentally between Win98 and ME. So a firewall for Win98 won't work on Win10. And things that use a lot of wrappers or are very low-level won't always work. For instance, AV might need to be updated more often because it needs low- level control. And DotNet software has to have its respective runtime installed. But for documented API functions, you can pretty much depend on any function to work, up to 25 years old. The Win10 API is an augmented version of the Win95 API. When asked for details to back up the claims you make, you get evasive and finally dismissive. In short, you're an evangelist, bending the truth to support your enthusiasm. That does nothing to help people who might actually want to try Linux. If you were offering accurate information that would be great: Firewall that does what I want? Yes or no. If yes then which one? But you won't answer straight. People who might try Linux need to know they're getting themselves into a partly finished do-it-yourself kit that probably never will be finished. Like the teenager who's forever rebuilding car on the front lawn rather than driving it. And in some ways it's actually worse than that. Linux designers, in recent years, have taken the same approach as Microsoft -- gradually hiding how things work, obfuscating true admin/root while offering a fake admin/root, encouraging people to let things update themselves... They're moving something that's eternally beta to a kiosk design in order to attract more people. That can make for big problems. Last time I decided to try a multi-boot Linux install I had to quit because I didn't trust the installer to do what I told it to. It kept wanting to choose a partition with Windows rather than the Linux partitions I'd already set up. In the early days of Linux at least I didn't have to contend with ninny functions and lying limitations. |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
Mayayana wrote:
"T" wrote snip The problem is that you keep actively trying to sell Linux to people. Your answer is always that people should try a Linux CD. Computer problems? Dry skin? Losing crops to drought? Wife doesn't orgasm? Your answer to everything is Linux. Enthusiasm is fine but you're also providing misinformation. So are you. * You answered my complaint about firewalls without actually knowing the answer. Yes you rail about Linux doesn't have any per application based firewall but like it is like Linux doesn't have antivirus either. The reason is it is not really needed. Linux has a completely different approach to security. Unlike Windows that has most things open and then adds stuff to plug the holes, Linux starts with stuff closed until you explicitly open open them. (Windows is moving to more things closed albeit slowly...) So an application based firewall is not needed just don't allow app access to networking. You can do that with services like apparmor. Deny application access to network and it won't 'phone home'. -- Take care, Jonathan ------------------- LITTLE WORKS STUDIO http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/12/19 7:42 AM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Mayayana wrote: "T" wrote snip The problem is that you keep actively trying to sell Linux to people. Your answer is always that people should try a Linux CD. Computer problems? Dry skin? Losing crops to drought? Wife doesn't orgasm? Your answer to everything is Linux. Enthusiasm is fine but you're also providing misinformation. So are you. * You answered my complaint about firewalls without actually knowing the answer. Yes you rail about Linux doesn't have any per application based firewall but like it is like Linux doesn't have antivirus either. The reason is it is not really needed. Linux has a completely different approach to security. Unlike Windows that has most things open and then adds stuff to plug the holes, Linux starts with stuff closed until you explicitly open open them. (Windows is moving to more things closed albeit slowly...) So an application based firewall is not needed just don't allow app access to networking. You can do that with services like apparmor. Deny application access to network and it won't 'phone home'. SeLinux is a great example |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/12/19 3:32 AM, Mike wrote:
On 3/12/2019 2:21 AM, T wrote: Install from a Live USB to a Sumsung flash drive in a USB 3.1/C jack and it will give Windows a run for its money performance wise. I have actually had them go faster in some customer's machines. I've done this with external USB hard drives but have concerns about thumb drives. The only one I have found that is trouble free is the Samsung Does the installer identify a flash drive and configure itself to be gentle with the writes to flash? No idea Does the Samsung USB flash have any internal help like wear leveling? no idea. I only use them to troubleshoot. Kingston and Kanguru corrupted all the time. |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/12/19 6:40 AM, Mayayana wrote:
This is all just red herrings. Code Weavers is a commercial WINE wrapper. Wine Staging, according to their own webpage, is optional beta features that can be installed early. Wine and Codeweavers are the same people. I have asked them and they have verified it. None of that has anything to do with the basic problem that WINE isn't a dependable option for Windows software on Linux and that, in fact, the entire design of WINE is deeply flawed. They act like teenagers trying to hack specific Windows programs, rather than creating a cross-platform API system that Windows programmers can target. They can never have a finished product, by design. All Red Hat releases are using Staging. It is a group better than regular Wine. And it still has a way to go |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/12/19 6:40 AM, Mayayana wrote:
The problem is that you keep actively trying to sell Linux to people You are going off on a tangent. I work with three different OS'es and I am just giving my evaluation. I clearly state when I think Linux has short comings. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Reason *TO* pick on Windows 10
On 3/12/19 3:43 AM, Paul wrote:
T wrote: On 3/12/19 1:48 AM, T wrote: On 3/12/19 1:28 AM, Paul wrote: Mike was referring to "trial" of a LiveDVD without installation. You can't trial every possible thing from a LiveDVD, unless you set up a persistent store. True and an art form in its own. This is typically done on LiveDVDs transferred to USB sticks, where a 4GB persistence file ("casper-rw") is added to the USB key, so that more extensive procedures can be tried. Such as installing the NVidia graphics driver, trying VirtualBox or VMPlayer. Not everyone has scratch drives for installing Linux for testing. I have a ton of drives, and you can never really have enough drives for this sort of testing. For example, right now, when I'm finished with the 500GB HDD in the Test Machine, I have to restore from backup, to put the previous experiment back on there. But a lot of us have Flash drives kicking around.Â* And you can install to them and test whatever you want. The best flash drive for this I have found are from Samsung. No troubles with massive small file transfers.Â* Patriot are the worst. Install from a Live USB to a Sumsung flash drive in a USB 3.1/C jack and it will give Windows a run for its money performance wise. I have actually had them go faster in some customer's machines. This is bad advice. I've ruined two USB keys doing exactly that. No more USB keys will be used here for either persistent store or for install as slash. When the first one failed, I pretended it was a fluke. When the second one failed not too much longer after that, I stopped pretending. If it needs storage, it goes on a HDD. One of the scratch HDDs (I probably have five or six 500GB ones for this, some are scratch because of the danger they might fail). Even the ones with a few reallocations showing, haven't actually died on me yet. The flash keys that failed, were TLC based, because I opened up the sticks and looked up the chip numbers in Google. If you have a stick old enough to be based on MLC or SLC, that's probably safe for installation purposes, just because there are more write cycles available (even if the technology doesn't have effective wear leveling). If I had proof that the USB flash stick had as good wear leveling as an SSD does, I wouldn't be nearly as concerned. But the way these sticks fails, suggests there is little in the way of wear leveling there. And it could be all too easy to "burn a hole" in one as a result. The sticks behaved slowly at first (write rate drops to 1.5 to 3MB/sec), and it isn't that much later before the thing disappears completely. ******* And newer sticks are getting worse. I bought a Sandisk Extreme maybe a year and a half ago, and it has worked consistently. I liked it enough, to look for such a stick at the computer store a couple weeks ago. The model number had changed, as you would expect. I brought the stick home, and read speed was 50MB/sec. That is hardly Extreme. I tried using "dd", and did "dd if=/dev/urandom" and used a random bit pattern to write the stick from end to end. After that, a read test gave a more uniform 150MB/sec on read. So the root cause of the initial terrible performance, is "mushy TLC" syndrome. This is where every sector on the stick, when you get it, has errors requiring ECC correction inside the stick. This causes the read rate to drop, because the microcontroller inside the chip does the correction in firmware. There isn't a dedicated hardware block for error correction. TLC is bad enough, theyÂ* might use 50 bytes of overhead for every 512 bytes of data. And the poor microcontroller then has to work out which bits in the just-read block need to be flipped. I'm expecting if I leave data on the new stick, then three months from now the read rate will have dropped to 50MB/sec again. The question then is, how long before the 512 byte block is "uncorrectable". The 50 byte number is assumed to be powerful enough for a certain error rate over time. And the "mushy" behavior isn't supposed to lead to data loss. But how warm and fuzzy do I feel about this... Hmmm. I have other USB sticks that are slow but consistent. I might not have a problem using those, but because they're slow, the experience wouldn't be all that pleasant. Nobody enjoys consistent 3MB/sec write rates (a couple of them had that speed from day one). If you got some good USB sticks, then great... I fully recommend my OCZ RALLY2 8GB, which is bulletproof (at least compared to the pile of TLC rubbish sitting on my desk right now). I probably bought that eight or ten years ago. That would be a good candidate for an install. But I only own one of those (it had a mail in rebate, one per household). Â*Â* Paul Paul, My experience too. I only use Samsung now for these purposes. And I never meant to imply that your should use it for anything other than testing. I have even put Intel SATA SSD drives into USB 3 carriers and had them corrupt, but Intel SSD stink anyway. -T |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|