Dell Selling Dual-Boot Laptops

rsmiller510 writes "The EE Times reports this week that Dell has released a hybrid laptop running both Linux and Windows clearly aimed at business travelers. Linux for quick tasks and Windows for more intensive ones, but will such a machine really fly in the business world?"

Comments

Will it fly?

[erroneus]

NO!

Rebooting is a chore. Once people start up, they don't want to shut down to start up another application. It's not what they are used to. On the other hand, if this were done as a VM where the Linux machine were to boot and they installed Windows XP in a VirtualBox or some other VM, then that might be acceptable. Then they would have their safer, virus-free environment for email and web browsing and then a VM to host the applications they need to run. This stuff works really well.

Re:Will it fly?

[Yvanhoe]

It will fly, but you have to leave the laptop out of the bag for security check. Have a nice flight sir...

Re:Will it fly?

[morgan_greywolf]

I agree. And you can even suspend/hibernate/resume and both OSes will retain their state. This is what I did for my wife's laptop. She occasionally needs Windows for a few things (like loading/converting other people's Microsoft Publisher or Visio files), and it works great. Just make sure you buy lots of RAM.

Re:Will it fly?

[jandersen]

What they should do - what I am sure someone will do at some point - is to make an "LPARable" PC/laptop after the same general principle as IBM's newest pSeries servers. The system would come with a VM hypervisor in NVRAM, as the "BIOS", and all other systems would run under that, concurrently.

Re:Will it fly?

[erroneus]

Now that many RAM makers have been spanked for price fixing, RAM is cheap again... nicely cheap. Lots of RAM ain't hard to come by unless you are using an older machine. Then again, 4GB RAM (the standard maximum for a lot of machines made in the past 5 years) is starting to feel rather cramped.

Re:Will it fly?

[nickruiz]

Okay, I'm going to admit my ignorance in the hopes that someone else will learn. I've been a bit removed from Linux, so my question was going to be "Does Linux support the NTFS file system?" Because VMs running on FAT-based file systems suck. The last Linux-based OS I had used was Ubuntu 6.04 (Hardy Heron), which, to my knowledge didn't support NTFS.

Then, with 30 seconds of research, I came across NTFS-3G implementation.

All of that to say, I agree with the Windows VM idea. But Dell had better set up the VM, because most business people wouldn't have a clue.

Re:Will it fly?

[dokebi]

If the ARM side has access to the hard disk and wireless, I'll definitely be running it in ARM mode for 10x the battery life.

Re:Will it fly?

[Povno]

I agree.

My XP guest is actually less hardware intensive than if I were to run it native.

Generally most people accept an OS for what it is, if they are curious about other possiblities that are open to them they will find other options that best suit them and end at either conclusion (dual boot or VM) anyway.

Unless they were packaging a Windows disk in with the Linux at a percentage of retail cost then maybe i can see something in it. Then the buyer would save money on Windows for the VM.

Re:Will it fly?

[Nursie]

Why would you care if Linux had NTFS support if you're running windows in a VM?

Re:Will it fly?

[nickruiz]

Why would you care if Linux had NTFS support if you're running windows in a VM?

I suppose it depends on how you're setting up your container. If it's file-based, you would have a 4GB size limit.

Re:Will it fly?

[LDoggg_]

The Filesystem of the guest machine is irrelevant to the host.

The host can use small(2GB) chunks and tell the guest that it is one big drive. The guest OS can then format that into NTFS or whatever and store large files.

Re:Will it fly?

[columbus]

Yes, Linux supports NTFS. You've referenced the right module NTFS-3G.
Ubuntu has had this module included by default since version 7.10: gutsy gibbon. Prior to that, it had to be manually installed.

I run a windows XP / Ubuntu 7.10 dual boot setup at home & the NTFS support is great. Ubuntu can read and write to both windows & linux partitions flawlessly. All of your windows files are accessible in the linux mode. I think that there is a slight performance hit (10% or so) for using linux rather than windows to write to the ntfs partition.

Re:Will it fly?

[chebucto]

Why would you care if Linux had NTFS support if you're running windows in a VM?

It's helpful to be able to access the files on your virtual disk from your main OS. Being able to mount your virtual disk in GNU would be sweet.

Re:Will it fly?

[eln]

I agree with the virtualization bit. If this were 2002, or even 2005 I could see them thinking dual boot was the best way to go about putting Windows and Linux on the same box. Nowadays, though, using virtual machines is the clearly superior answer.

Re:Will it fly?

[TheRealMindChild]

For one file. Nothing says your "image" can't be multiple files. VMWare has supported this since the beginning. It is such a no-brainer, I don't see why any alternatives wouldn't either.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got to agree.... My Macbook runs OSX. Technically I could reboot to start up Windows, but it is just so much easier to install a Mac compatible program to do Windows stuff that I haven't bothered seeing XP on the screen in almost 3 months now...

Re:Will it fly?

[morgan_greywolf]

That'll change. 64-bit OSes are now mainstream -- and even VMs are becoming mainstream -- so it's only a matter of time before chipset and mobo manufacturers push the limits of more and more of their consumer-grade commodity stuff beyond the previous '4GB barrier'.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

What they should do - what I am sure someone will do at some point - is to make an "LPARable" PC/laptop after the same general principle as IBM's newest pSeries servers. The system would come with a VM hypervisor in NVRAM, as the "BIOS", and all other systems would run under that, concurrently.

I'd rather they just get rid of Windows myself, though in my personal opinion I consider Windows to be a generally lower-quality and less-secure solution that is better avoided if possible. That people so often take the "all viewpoints are equal" or "I'll ignore overwhelming evidence and pretend this is a matter of taste" cop-out when discussing Windows or comparing it to anything else amazes me. About the only things that Windows can do that another OS may have difficulty achieving is driver support for rather unusual hardware and availability of proprietary software such as Adobe Photoshop or various CAD solutions. Of course, both of those are market decisions and neither are inherent properties of the OS.

I just don't know any technically knowledgable person who is familiar with and skilled with multiple operating systems who still prefers Windows. I'm sure this mythic beast exists someplace and I'm sure lots of people will pipe up with their anecdotal answer to my anecdotal observation, but I have never seen such a person and outside of a few examples of Slashdot hearsay, I've never heard of such a person either. Granted, there are businesspeople who prefer Windows because it's not the Linux users who are spending $50-75 a pop to have a virus removed, but I'm talking now about a genuine non-financial preference.

Perhaps the same effort it would take to write a hypervisor and place it in NVRAM could be put towards asking their users why they still need Windows. Dell is a large vendor with at least some industry clout. Maybe they could remedy some of the reasons why their users still need Windows. Whether that would mean pressuring proprietary software companies to go multiplatform or whether it would mean contributing to the WINE project is unknown to me but I wonder if they have considered the option.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Q: why do you need 10x the battery life?

A: because under arm applications are 10x slower

Re:Will it fly?

[onefriedrice]

Worse than rebooting is maintaining two separate configurations. For example, if you use an email client, you configure it on both sides. Browser, same thing. And so on.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I've been getting those calls too.

They irritate me so much that I have started a company that provides a service to help reduce the amount of nuisance calls.

We'll be getting in touch over the next few weeks to discuss which of our packages is right for you. Sign up within the next month and we offer free insurance on your garden furniture!

Re:Will it fly?

[beyondkaoru]

Personally, I didn't switch over to Linux until I had a computer that was purely Linux. I had a dual boot machine for a while, but simply never ended up using the Linux partition, except the first time it was installed. Rather than the dual boot helping me learn, it just sat there. The better learning experience was probably doing things for school on the command line over ssh (via putty).

I eventually simply had to make the plunge, and have been very happy with Linux since.

Re:Will it fly?

[Mr. Underbridge]

so it's only a matter of time before chipset and mobo manufacturers push the limits of more and more of their consumer-grade commodity stuff beyond the previous '4GB barrier'.

Yep, but for now multiple active VM's are a non-starter when Windows itself needs 4GB. The only way I can see it is if one had a very lightweight version of Linux that did nothing but host the VMs, and then a VM of Windows and a VM of Linux to alternate between.

Re:Will it fly?

[TreyGeek]

Ummmm... LPARs have been part of the System z line of IBM Mainframes for some time now. So the ability to run multiple operating systems concurrently on a single piece of hardware is not new.

Re:Will it fly?

[chaim79]

The new 17inch Macbook Pro's have an 8gb limit.

Dell XPS line of laptops also have an 8gb limit.

It may take a while for that standard to trickle down to the lower end laptops, but the trend at least has started.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but it runs 64 bit Vista home.

The list of apps that won't run is a hell of a lot larger than the ones it will.

Re:Will it fly?

[kimvette]

Hmm, a Linux laptop would also fly if it were in Ballmer's presence and he ran out of chairs. . .

Re:Will it fly?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I wouldn't write this one off too soon. This isn't a simple dual boot which, I admit, is largely pointless in this context. This is a setup where you can either run Linux on an embedded ARM core, or Windows on the main x86. The Linux option won't just be for a slightly shorter boot time, it will be for vastly longer runtime, which could well be interesting to a fair few people under many circumstances.

Re:Will it fly?

[Hal_Porter]

Thanks to virtualisation you can run Windows and boot up Linux in a virtual machine when you need to.

Re:Will it fly?

[Chabil Ha']

I agree. I decided to give Vista (another) try and didn't mind doing menial tasks like surfing, coding, and email. I left my XP partition for gaming. However, I found myself just booting straight into XP because it seemed bothersome to go somewhere that gave me less functionality and endure a reboot just to game.

Re:Will it fly?

[causality]

Yes, Linux supports NTFS. You've referenced the right module NTFS-3G. Ubuntu has had this module included by default since version 7.10: gutsy gibbon. Prior to that, it had to be manually installed.

I run a windows XP / Ubuntu 7.10 dual boot setup at home & the NTFS support is great. Ubuntu can read and write to both windows & linux partitions flawlessly. All of your windows files are accessible in the linux mode. I think that there is a slight performance hit (10% or so) for using linux rather than windows to write to the ntfs partition.

The sole downside to that arrangement is that it does not provide any facility for fsck-type maintainance of the NTFS filesystem. The NTFS-3G userspace driver unfortunately does not come bundled with anything of the sort and I've had difficulty trying to find a standalone fsck.ntfs type of program. You can find good programs to read, write, and resize an NTFS filesystem but no Open Source software seems able to repair one. I'd love to find out I'm wrong about this. A friend of mine used a setup like this and eventually experienced a small amount of data loss after unexpected shutdowns (power failures) that were not immediately repaired like Windows would have done on bootup.

If anyone does know a reliable way to repair NTFS filesystems under Linux without actually running Windows, please let me know. Otherwise I'd recommend staying away from NTFS filesystems if at all possible or considering an alternative like FAT32 (as terrible as that may be). If you don't mind Windows having read-only access to your data, you may want to try the EXT2/3 driver for Windows as an alternative.

Re:Will it fly?

[Tubal-Cain]

What were you expecting? 32 bit?

Re:Will it fly?

[vux984]

Rebooting is a chore. Once people start up, they don't want to shut down to start up another application. It's not what they are used to. On the other hand, if this were done as a VM where the Linux machine were to boot and they installed Windows XP in a VirtualBox or some other VM, then that might be acceptable. Then they would have their safer, virus-free environment for email and web browsing and then a VM to host the applications they need to run. This stuff works really well.

RTFA.

First, your average business traveller doesn't want to un Windows in a VirtualBox.

Second, these aren't really 'dual booting' in the usual sense. These have an embedded linux, that's almost instant on, running on a low power ARM chip.

Windows is on the hard drive, and runs of the Core2Duo or whatever the main cpu is.

So when you boot, you can choose instant on, embedded linux, running cool with long battery life on the ARM, or you can launch the full blown windows install on the intel cpu.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

You think that's cramped? Both my desktop and laptop only have 512 MB of RAM.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just make sure you buy lots of RAM.

But I haven't even met her! Besides, I think roses might be more romantic.

Re:Will it fly?

[AusIV]

I used to have a laptop that was set up so that I could boot Windows, or load the same Windows installation in a VM.

That laptop wasn't really capable of good virtualization, but if you need both Windows and Linux, I'd say that's the way to go. If you need to access some lightweight program, pull it up in a VM. If you need dedicated resources (or dependable graphics acceleration), reboot. Configuring hardware profiles can be a bit of a pain, but if we're talking about selling computers with this out of the box, why not?

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

use Firefox (or Opera) + Thunderbird and point them at the same data directory.

Re:Will it fly?

[Jurily]

Rebooting is a chore.

Yeah, have it crash randomly.

Re:Will it fly?

[SnarfQuest]

But, will it blend?

Re:Will it fly?

[Teun]

The ext2/3 driver(s) for Windows are R/W.

Re:Will it fly?

[rec9140]

>Thanks to virtualisation you can run Windows and boot up Linux in a virtual machine when you need to.

Thanks to virtualization you can run Linux and boot up winslobber in a virtual machine when you need to.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Will it fly?

[pipatron]

Linux doesn't have a 4GB file size limit, or what do you mean has the limit?

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you store your profile for the application (such as firefox or thunderbird) on a FAT32 partition then you can access the same profile from both Windows and Linux. I do this on my laptop. If you use shared folders for this profile you can even access it from with in a virtual machine.

Re:Will it fly?

[bill_kress]

MAYBE

Assuming windows can learn to suspend to disk as well as Linux (a HUGE assumption), I think there could be a really good case for choosing which system you want to resume at boot-time.

From the consumer point of view, you get a screen at boot time that says "Browsing" and "Full Windows O/S", you pick browsing and you have your browser up in 3 seconds without a login. You pick the other alternative and windows thrashes for 30 seconds before it stabilizes. I could see uses for both.

Re:Will it fly?

[hairyfeet]

The problem with that idea is VM performance is simply lacking when compared to an actual desktop. It is getting better, but it still just doesn't match the "feel" of running native. And for the programs a business user would run why not just have Crossover Office installed and save the hassle of the VM?

The reason why dual boots are popular with the geek crowd is there is just too many apps that run poorly in VM. This is why I always thought the SSD/HDD hybrid drive was a good idea for laptops. You could put the OS code in an 8GB partition(or 2 4GB in this case) and have it boot very fast and then use the larger HDD section for file storage.

But while VMs are nice on servers the average user, even the average business user, will find it too much work with too little performance. Much easier to have simply the Winflag and Penguin on a boot screen and let them choose which to use.

Re:Will it fly?

[jabjoe]

This sounds to me like a reverse RiscPC! Like the RiscPC the other half will have to have emulated hardware. If Dell don't release with this, someone will do it for them. It will be too useful not to be done. Unlike the RiscPC, you can boot straight into either half. This could be great for showing people (who aren't technical) Linux. I can see people speed booting into Linux and setting Windows booting in the VM and surfing the web while Windows boots, then asking themselves, acturally, do I need Windows and Office, they are expensive? The answer is increasly, no.

My only slight fear is though it will show to people Linux can run on many architectures and boot quickly, if the Linux is just running on the ARM, the less informed users will think Linux is less powerful than Windows (which is running on the faster x86).

Re:Will it fly?

[x78]

Not necessarily, if you are using cross platform applications then you can just often copy accross the configs.
It may take a little effort but still, saves doing the initial configuring more than once!

Re:Will it fly?

[arth1]

The ext2/3 driver(s) for Windows are R/W.

True, but it's unusable as the root file system.
And also unusable by apps that use 8+3 (SFN) links internally, like Microsoft Office.

Re:Will it fly?

[jcgf]

Nah, it would be like witches and water... He'd melt.

Re:Will it fly?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

While I agree that the limitations of Linux NTFS support can be annoying, why would somebody who doesn't have access to Windows be using an NTFS partition? If Windows is out of the picture, there is no reason to even think about using NTFS. If Windows is in the picture, you can use it to clean up the NTFS partition(s) when needed.

Re:Will it fly?

[JAlexoi]

Well you have probably not seen Splashtop and ExpressGate from ASUS.
Not only does it fly, it's also actually WORKS.

Re:Will it fly?

[NotQuiteReal]

I thought witches floated?

Re:Will it fly?

[lord_sarpedon]

Hardy is version 8.04, not 6.04, and has NTFS read and write support out of the box. Any NTFS partitions show up in the Gnome places menu. Easy.

Re:Will it fly?

[lmfr]

ntfsfix is the equivalent fsck.ntfs

It comes in the package ntfsprogs.

Re:Will it fly?

[Dark_Gravity]

+1 Funny!

But, will it blend?

That's the very question I was wondering!

Re:Will it fly?

[H310iSe]

I would love to see a thorough real-world user-level and tech-level review of linux -> vm -> windows it seems in theory like the answer to so many problems but I keep hearing it's still just. not. there. yet. Yes, I'm about to do another test install (been ... 2 or 3 years since I tried it, was so not ready for the general public back then).

Re:Will it fly?

[hey!]

Actually, I have an Asus F8VA-C1 machine that has this feature. The Linux environment is specially optimized to boot in about eight seconds from the point you hit the switch. It provides a basic suite of applications (real ones, like FireFox and Skype). Shutdown is just as quick, or you can choose to exit Linux and start Windows without doing a machine reset/POST.

If you hit the button for Linux and instantly change your mind, you can just immediately exit Linux to Vista and it doesn't make any significant difference to the total Vista boot time, although that's not saying much.

In any case, this kind of environment is not designed to be used as you suggest, with some apps residing on Linux and some on Windows. It's designed as an alternative for situations like when you're in the airport about to board and want to check your email. I actually kept my "Splashtop" partition, even though I promptly replaced Vista with 64 bit Ubuntu. What kind fo a moron ships 32 bit Vista on a machine with 4GB of RAM installed?

Re:Will it fly?

[FatdogHaiku]

I thought witches floated?

They do, as a layer of scum on the water, once they have finished melting. Interestingly, the scum is also able to support very small rocks.

Re:Will it fly?

[causality]

ntfsfix is the equivalent fsck.ntfs

It comes in the package ntfsprogs.

I appreciate you pointing this out but I looked into it and unfortunately it looks like a partial solution.

From the output of "man ntfsfix":

DESCRIPTION
ntfsfix is a utility that fixes some common NTFS problems. ntfsfix is NOT a Linux version of chkdsk. It only repairs some fundamental NTFS inconsistencies, resets the NTFS journal file and schedules an NTFS consistency check for the first boot into Windows.

Regretably, that does not make me feel very confident. Filesystem integrity is one of the few areas where I really must insist on a complete solution. I don't take that position because I want to but because it's dictated by necessity. Preventable data loss or even the possibility of such is simply not acceptable to me.

Just my personal opinion, I don't really consider trying to play catch-up with Microsoft's proprietary standards (or even when the standards are published, their proprietary implementations) to be a sound idea especially when truly open alternatives are readily available. I just feel like you're always going to have problems like this that you can never completely overcome because you're playing someone else's game. Considering the inherent difficulty of this task, the progress that Open Source has made is really quite amazing but I just don't consider this to be anything like an ideal solution.

Microsoft created NTFS, they own it, they can "upgrade" or change it on a whim, and they have no interest in anyone else being able to work with it. That's the nature of the situation and it's beyond our control. Therefore, to me, NTFS compatibility is very much like a dual-boot setup; it is to be avoided unless truly necessary.

Re:Will it fly?

[morgan_greywolf]

Isn't it true that most current 32-bit apps will run on 64-bit Vista, but that 16-bit Windows apps (a practically dead breed), 32-bit drivers, and some older 32-bit apps won't? I definitely wouldn't expect 32-bit drivers, so if you need to a device that doesn't have a 64-bit driver, you're a bit screwed, but other than that, you should be fine, right?

Re:Will it fly?

[Eg0Death]

If you have access to Dell's Premiere site (for businesses) you can order a Precision M6400 laptop with a 64 bit OS and 16 GB of RAM. This turns into an $8,000 laptop, but who's counting $s anyway?

Re:Will it fly?

[leromarinvit]

Q: why do you need 10x the battery life?

A: because under arm applications are 10x slower

And, of course, with x86 you can type 10x faster.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

But will it? Really? The type of chip you have has no bearing whatsoever on the display, which is by far the biggest drain.

Re:Will it fly?

[rts008]

Ubuntu 6.04 was Dapper Drake, not Hardy Heron. :-)

NTFS did seem spotty on 6.04, but on 8.04 (Hardy Heron)and newer, NTFS support has been seamless and fully functional IMO. (may have happened sooner- I don't remember which version upgrade removed NTFS-3G)

Re:Will it fly?

[rts008]

Go farther up the thread, I think here where he mentions FAT file systems.

Because VMs running on FAT-based file systems suck.

Re:Will it fly?

[jonbryce]

I manage to run MacOSX and Windows XP at the same time on 2GB without any problems. I also manage Ubuntu and Windows 2003 SBS on 4GB.

Re:Will it fly?

[jonbryce]

NTFS-3G runs on FUSE, so it isn't anything like as fast as a native filesystem, but yes it works.

Re:Will it fly?

[jonbryce]

If you are a business user, their target market, then you probably need Outlook / Evolution for your email. There isn't really a viable Windows version of Evolution, there certainly isn't a Linux version of Outlook, and Thunderbird isn't really a viable substitute.

Re:Will it fly?

[dooby_Monster]

works well and had this setup before. Found the setup way to slow when it came to actually working on the vmware machine itself. Back to dual booting with windows and linux. Best way to go

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is this new fangled invention called a "Blackberry" for checking your email at the airport.

Re:Will it fly?

[dooby_Monster]

fsck ntfsprogs

Re:Will it fly?

[Tenebrousedge]

What I read about the ARM side of things seemed to indicate that it booted off of a small piece of flash memory but had access to the hard disk. Reviews of this device seem scarce. The reviews of the e4300 seem to mainly date from last year, and indicate that the Linux side has read-only access to things like Outlook contacts, and not much else, but that read-write access and internet access and such were going to be enabled at some unspecified future point.

I don't have much use for Outlook; I'd want to wipe the windows side and install linux. This thing seems like it might be a pretty hackable toy. Some reviews mentioned a "funny looking BIOS, probably linux-based". If this thing has an open source bios, I'd hope to be able to cut down boot time significantly. At the least it would be a wonderful opportunity to get into the bowels of the machine and find out how it ticks. And considering the processor setup, that seems like it would be an interesting journey indeed. I wonder which processor the BIOS uses?

Re:Will it fly?

[Nursie]

This is true, however you can always use a network share,

Many years ago I had a sweet setup with a dual boot win2k/redhat machine. VMware made it possible to boot either inside the other. Samba provided the file access between the two.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

NTFSFix doesn't really repair the filesystem.

IIRC, it simply performs some extremely basic checks and flags the volume to be checked on the next (Windows) reboot.

At least, that's how it worked a year or so ago.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Close but no cigar. It does minimal cleanup and marks the filesystem as dirty (it's better than nothing).
Source: http://man.linux-ntfs.org/ntfsfix.8.html

Re:Will it fly?

[pipingguy]

To go from 4GB to 8GB with that MacBook Pro will cost you twelve hundred dollars. I really have to wonder if the performance difference is worth that much. Doubling my older MBP's RAM to 4GB was ~$300, that's a reasonable price.

Re:Will it fly?

[morgan_greywolf]

The beancounters! ;)

Re:Will it fly?

[ryanov]

Yup. Just recently got some. Told them to get lost.

Re:Will it fly?

[chaim79]

Yah... the price tag is a bit high... all the OEM's like to jack up the price of the upgrades. I think the Ram on a MB Pro is considered "User Replaceable"... in other words you can replace it without voiding your warranty...

BTW, love the sig.

Re:Will it fly?

[Allador]

I think what you're missing is that your alleged pure technical superiority is meaningless in the real world.

Computers & OS's are just tools.

If the OS tool of windows has some other tools (software) or compatibility that you need, but the other tool (linux) doesnt, then all the alleged technical superiority in the world doesnt matter.

Just like if theoretically Betamax was a technically superior product, that means all home users should have bought betamax rather than VHS, and be damned that they couldnt rent any videos to watch on it?

Re:Will it fly?

[Allador]

Why would you need it? NTFS is a journalling file system, so you dont, except in very extraordinary cases, need something like chkdsk.

It's not like running on ext2 or fat, where if you crash, you need to do a disk check/fsck on next startup.

Re:Will it fly?

[LittleRunningGag]

With 4GB I've got my lab machine running three instances of 2K3 (one running Exchange 2007), one instance of CentOS, two instances of the Cisco IOS on Dynamips, all running on a Vista box.  And that's just a Pentium D.

It doesn't run super quick, but everything except the Exchange machine runs okay.

Re:Will it fly?

[Anonymous Coward]

here, smartass: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typewriter; battery problem solved. you can type for ages with one of those.

Re:Will it fly?

[Arthurio]

May not be a popular opinion around here but why not Windows installed natively and linux in vm. Would make sense to me. After all it's the windows applications that require more resources and thus should be closer to the hardware. Examples include all Adobe products, games etc

Re:Will it fly?

[jandersen]

I know - however, the LPARs on the mainframe are of a different nature from what you have on a pSeries or iSeries; the partitioning scheme on the latter are more similar VMware, whereas the mainframe do it more in "hardware" (or microcode, possibly). I should really say "IBM mainframe" here, I think Amdahl and Hitachi do it differently.

Re:Will it fly?

[lmfr]

I won't dispute your point, only remark that ntfsfix, as other ntfsprogs, tries very hard to be conservative, and bail out if unsupported metadata is found.

For my cases, it has worked correctly. One recurring problem is with a NTFS formated pen disk, that sees some hard shutdowns.

Re:Will it fly?

[Insanity Defense]

Okay, I'm going to admit my ignorance in the hopes that someone else will learn. I've been a bit removed from Linux, so my question was going to be "Does Linux support the NTFS file system?" Because VMs running on FAT-based file systems suck. The last Linux-based OS I had used was Ubuntu 6.04 (Hardy Heron), which, to my knowledge didn't support NTFS.

I use LinuxMint 5 and have a 750 GB USB HD formated with NTFS on an WinXP machine, it reads and writes to it quite easily. I use it for backup storage. So I would say that Linux can handle NTFS.

Re:Will it fly?

[erroneus]

For starters, running in a VM on i686 and above is pretty near to native performance. Next, resources like memory can be allocated in rather imbalanced ways. Finally, whichever one needs to reboot the least often should be the host. Think about it. But Gamers shouldn't have any issues with dual booting anyway since they literally run one application at a time unless it's one of those cheating bot programs that needs to run at the same time as the game. In any case, a Linux VM host can be made to run extremely lean such that you would almost not know it is there.

Re:Will it fly?

[irgu]

NTFS-3G implements online recovery. Look for the recover and norecover mount options: http://www.ntfs-3g.org/releases.html

Re:Will it fly?

[CarpetShark]

What? You want the 8GB limit to trickle down from these machines? I'd be looking for a higher limit to trickle down TO these machines. 8GB max is pitiful, considering that 2-4GB is easily the norm now.

Re:Will it fly?

[irgu]

The free NTFS-3G driver is slower than the commercial, also FUSE based one which overperforms stable kernel file systems, except ext4. Most file system requests are served by the FUSE kernel module without any user space involvement.

Re:Will it fly?

[causality]

Why would you need it? NTFS is a journalling file system, so you dont, except in very extraordinary cases, need something like chkdsk.

It's not like running on ext2 or fat, where if you crash, you need to do a disk check/fsck on next startup.

I freely admit that you can probably fill a library with what I don't know about the low-level details of filesystems. Having said that, I'll give you my take on the description from the man page.

It only repairs some fundamental NTFS inconsistencies, resets the NTFS journal file and schedules an NTFS consistency check for the first boot into Windows.

To me, a "consistency check" on a journaling filesystem means playing back the journal to ensure a consistent state. I will speculate that the chkdsk utility that comes with Windows primary does this, and may also perform other repairs (like actually scanning/repairing the entire filesystem the same way a non-journaling filesystem would need to do) if they are necessary. The wording of "resets the NTFS journal file and schedules an NTFS consistency check for the first boot into Windows" tells me that ntfsfix is either unable or is only partly able to do this and therefore, you still need Windows for this task. Because I consider preventable data loss to be absolutely unacceptable, and not just an inconvenience that it would be nice to avoid, this does not make me feel very confident.

If I am wrong about this and it turns out that ntfsfix can completely handle all journal functions and you would only need Windows utilities in the very rare instance that damage is done that replaying the journal (and any other measures ntfsfix can handle) cannot repair, that does somewhat mitigate my concern. It doesn't completely remove my concern though because every now and then, unlikely things do happen and I greatly prefer to be prepared for them. Especially considering that I have no Windows installation and no Microsoft software, I would basically be SOL if this happened to me. So for me, this represents a gamble even if it's one in which the odds are not against me.

Re:Will it fly?

[DarKnyht]

We could build a bridge out of her...

Re:Will it fly?

[badkarmadayaccount]

Who is the bumbling buffoon who didn't setup a multithreaded driver stack, if not for performance gains, then at least for backwards compatibility. *grumble* *grumble*

Re:Will it fly?

[badkarmadayaccount]

Could I get rid of the intel CPU and Windows, and fill it up with batteries instead?

Re:Will it fly?

[badkarmadayaccount]

Can Linux do heterogeneous SMP? Someone call Linus... *thinks* And the LLVM project...

This is new?

[Locke2005]

My boss at FEI has been doing the exact same thing with VMWare for years. It is already flying in the business world; the only difference now is Dell is pre-installing it.

Re:This is new?

[MightyYar]

This is different because the Linux install does not run on the relatively power-hungry x86 chip.

I could see this making sense

[muppetman462]

I can see this from a business aspect, but I would think that people would be thinking, "why do I want to boot into Linux when I have windows right here?" Oh well, at least dell is trying.

Re:I could see this making sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Once they innevitably complete botch their windows partition: I could imagine some people trying linux.

Re:I could see this making sense

[erroneus]

Wooo! Now That is a perspective that had not entered my mind! Suddenly Windows becomes "broken-slow" mode and Linux becomes "Reliable Backup" mode.

A Linux "spare tire" might well be a good way to prove its reliability to the average user/consumer.

Re:I could see this making sense

[Anonymous Coward]

This is my only condition for fixing someone's computer for free; they get the newest version of Ubuntu booted alongside their nice clean Windows partition, just in case that Winpartition should get sick again. Not a single complaint, though most people still want their Windows fixed even when their Ubuntu works for gaming reasons.

Re:I could see this making sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Or it may further solidify Linux's reputation as a throw away environment that you do not use to get "real work" done.

Re:I could see this making sense

[Taibhsear]

Indeed. After I had to reinstall windows for my friend for the third time (he has some innate talent to destroy his system) I put a small ubuntu partition on his drive so I could more easily retrieve his data from the borked windows partition.

Re:I could see this making sense

[tepples]

"why do I want to boot into Linux when I have windows right here?"

Because Linux can boot from the end of POST to a fully loaded desktop in five seconds. Can even Windows 7 do this?

Re:I could see this making sense

[Dan Ost]

That's exactly what it will be for some people. But for others, if they find that Linux offers them what they would otherwise use Windows for, Linux may become a viable alternative for regular use.

This is a good thing.

Re:I could see this making sense

[AmberBlackCat]

Or... they could restart, press their F8 key or whatever, and do System Restoration. This is only going to be good for people like me, who actually like to dual boot and would like getting Linux working to be somebody else's problem. Let Dell provide the drivers for all that undetected hardware. And it would be cool to see a system restore partition for this.

Re:I could see this making sense

[AmberBlackCat]

The operating system for a TI-89 calculator can boot even faster. Maybe they should dual-boot that.

Re:I could see this making sense

[tepples]

OK, let me rephrase: Because Linux can become ready to do significant things that the target audience finds useful in five seconds, while Windows might take 45 seconds to become ready to do the same things.

Re:I could see this making sense

[Alex Belits]

Or... they could restart, press their F8 key or whatever, and do System Restoration.

...into unpatched Windows from 2-5 years ago? Good luck keeping it un-pwned until the updates will finish downloading.

Re:I could see this making sense

[falconwolf]

I would think that people would be thinking, "why do I want to boot into Linux when I have windows right here?"

Because Linux will boot up faster. However you're right in that people would think why should they get one. In a good economy they may want to play with it, but we're in a bad economy now and many won't spend money on what they don't think they need.

Falcon

Re:I could see this making sense

[Anonymous Coward]

What, no "linux users with spare tires" jokes?

Honestly

[noundi]

As a Linux user I'd have to say that this is a really shitty solution. The only people that dual boot are those that really, and I mean fucking really, need to (and unless they are bound by hardware compability these often use a VM solution instead) and those that have Linux installed for the "cool hacker" factor.

Re:Honestly

[zappepcs]

I dual boot for one simple reason: The machine I bought had XP on it, it's a legal copy, and having it provides some level of compatibility with Windows only software for now. I don't use Windows, but keep that drive installed and updated should I ever need a Windows machine. I boot to Windows about twice a month just to upgrade and run anti-virus software and make sure it still works. Other than that it just sits there. It's cheaper and more resource respectful to use the dual boot option and leave Windows on its own drive rather than VM options. I don't have to test/reconfigure things every time I upgrade Linux, just like two machines that I cannot use at the same time. It works for me.

Re:Honestly

[Falstius]

You can run your installed windows partition under a VM and avoid having to reboot at all.

Re:Honestly

[zappepcs]

Please re-read my post. I don't use Windows. I keep it running so I can use it if I have to for some compatibility reason or other. I give it 10 minutes of maintenance about twice a month... then go to bed while it runs the anti-virus etc. It would take much more than that to set up VM and fiddle with that every time I upgrade.. meh, I'll reboot if I ever have to use Windows for something, which is looking less and less likely thank you very much.

Re:Honestly

[PrescriptionWarning]

I've been using the same Windows VM in VMware at work for 2 years now and it has survived two Ubuntu upgrades just fine (7.04 -> 7.10 -> 8.04). I even have it on both my laptop and desktop since the files are easily copied and transferred to other systems. Basically you should only have to set it up once and then you're done, never to need to reinstall windows ever again assuming you don't lose the image to hard drive failure.

Re:Honestly

[sphantom]

Actually I don't believe you can. He likely has an OEM license which isn't transferable. As far as Microsoft is concerned, the virtualized environment is different "hardware" and hence requires it's own separate copy of Windows (even if you remove the installation running on bare metal).

Re:Honestly

[rtb61]

Dual boot 'business' machines has less to do with compatibility and likely more to do with, windows for 'public' work and Linux for private 'er' stuff ;).

The reality is of course, just consider them training machines designed to fit a niche, a really big niche, in fact most of the future market, the big swap over from windows to linux.

Good Idea but

[Pvt_Ryan]

it won't work. People will boot to the 1st OS (as they don't want to select one and they will get annoyed if the 1st OS in the boot menu is not windows because they won't be able to leave the computer unattended to boot.

Sadly it's human nature to be lazy. The computer would need to select the correct OS by reading the user's thoughts before it would be viable.

Re:Good Idea but

[TheGreatOrangePeel]

Why is this mod'd insightful? It's a pretty trivial matter to set grub to automatically boot you to windows and I'd be willing to bet that Dell is going to do for us by default.

Re:Good Idea but

[ForrestFire439]

Maybe they could put two power buttons on it: one to boot to linux and one to boot to Windows. Or they could put a little toggle switch on it and boot according to the user's preference by default.

Re:Good Idea but

[bendodge]

That's exactly what it is. There are two power buttons. One boots Windows, the other boots Linux on a special ARM thingy.

Re:Good Idea but

[harlequinade]

If they want auto-booting they just set the Grub menu so the OS they want is the default. If that default is linux, they just enable 'auto log-in' and there's no need to be there at all.

Re:Good Idea but

[happyemoticon]

Every time I format someone's system these days I install a small Linux partition on it (and ntfsclone the Windows partition onto it in case I need to recover the same system in the future). And I say, "I installed Linux on a small portion of your hard drive. If Windows ever gets screwed up and nobody's around to fix it, just reset and boot into Linux, and you can at least access the Internet and access your documents." It goes over really well. I even leave Ubuntu Live CD's with people now so they can have them around as a backup. One of my clients used it for a few days - she had business to take care of and couldn't part with her box - and was acceptably happy with it.

So, while most people still prefer Windows, business types A) Have a vague idea of what Linux is and B) See the value of having a very stable OS with fewer of the features they're used to around for emergencies.

Isn't this a dupe? Not just dual boot...

[argent]

Hasn't this already been seen, a couple months ago when Dell announced it?

It's not just dual boot, the Linux boot is on a low power ARM CPU, so not only does it boot fast you should get significantly more battery life when running Linux.

Dupe?

[Bearhouse]

It's not dual-booting really, you either run Linux on an ARM, or Windows on a Core2.

Link at end to the original EE article, rather than gushy blog.

Did we not cover this earlier this week?

http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=3TF41VYEZTQY0QSNDLRSKHSCJUNN2JVN?articleID=213402554&printable=true&printable=true

Re:Dupe?

[Culture20]

I'm sorry for not RTFA, but if their Linux runs on an ARM and Windows on a core2, could you partition some RAM and have _both_ OSes running concurrently without virtualization? That would be interesting.

Re:Dupe?

[rpmayhem]

Well, we talked about the same technology on Tuesday.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/10/146201

We also talked about it back in October.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/10/146201

Re:Dupe?

[Cillian]

Er, no. At least, not with this system. Nice idea, though.

Re:Dupe?

[daveime]

So was last Tuesday in October then ?

Either I just lost 3 months of my life, or you posted the same link twice !

Re:Dupe?

[rpmayhem]

Sigh...sorry about that.
Here's the correct link for 3 months ago... http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/03/057200

And here's the one from Tuesday again... http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/10/146201

Re:Dupe?

[CastrTroy]

Could be done, if you had some sort of integrated KVM. 2 complete systems in 1 box. would be a neat idea.

Re:Dupe?

[rpmayhem]

But on a laptop, that would eat through the battery running 2 systems at once. I guess you could put one OS on standby while you use the other. Semi-fast OS switching.

Re:Dupe?

[ksd1337]

Nah, I know what they'll do. Dell is the one who stole those 67 laptops from the nuclear facility! They then used the super-secret information to construct a laptop that runs off of nuclear power, therefore bypassing the limitation of battery power!

It's like science or something.

Will it blend?

[s.bots]

More importantly... Will it blend?

Re:Will it blend?

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it amusing this gets modded off topic, while another poster, 2 hours later, posts: "will it blend?" and gets +5 Funny

Re:Will it blend?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ditto, didn't seem right so I gave him my last mod point as Interesting. Posting anon to not undo the moderation.

Disagree with summary

[commodore64_love]

>>>Linux for quick tasks and Windows for more intensive ones

This implies that Linux can't do intensive work, as if it's not a real OS. That's not true, is it? Besides the real benefit of abandoning Windows is you can lower your retail price by ~$100, since Linux is free. With this dual boot configuration there's no price savings.

Well whatever. Bottom line is: If I could buy a Windows Vista machine with a Linux at no additional charge, then sure I'd go for it. I enjoy free extras.

Re:Disagree with summary

[i.r.id10t]

Retail price won't go down, may go up. Dell, et al, get $$ from application vendors for including trialware w/ icons on the desktop. AOL, McAffee, etc. all pay for "product placement". Ever wonder why a new in box machine has all sorts of icons, etc. on the desktop when a clean install of Windows doesn't?

Re:Disagree with summary

[Windows_NT]

I think be intensive tasks, they just mean things you cant do in linux. eg: Use linux for web browsing, checking email etc .. use windows for gaming, Powerpoint, MS office. basically what you need windows for. I use Windows for my intensive programming, because monodevelop doesnt support Code completion for VB, and Squirrel-sql doesnt have the drag and drop for views with big joins.

Re:Disagree with summary

[DrSkwid]

Where intensive == booting windows and running Norton AV

Re:Disagree with summary

[Falstius]

That's because the TFS left out a very important detail. The laptop will have two processors.

It runs with two chips, one from ARM and one from Intel. The ARM chip, provides instant on booting and is much more power efficient, while the Intel chip provides the juice to run apps that require more computing power.

So Linux can do heavy lifting, but the ARM chipping running it can't.

Re:Disagree with summary

[ColdWetDog]

Ever wonder why a new in box machine has all sorts of icons, etc. on the desktop when a clean install of Windows doesn't?

I always thought it was because Dell hated me...

Re:Disagree with summary

[Dan667]

I hate all the crapware they install on new computers. The very first thing I do is wipe the disk. Companies are going to have to come to terms with the fact that marketing your product in every possible way will not lead to increased profitability if your actual Customer hates it. I would go so far to say that I would pick a vendor that does not put all this crapware on the computer just so I don't need to re-install to get it off.

Re:Disagree with summary

[coolsnowmen]

You have to keep reading...
The the different OS's run on different processors.

Linux, running on the power efficient ARM on a flash drive is for quick tasks.

Windows, running on the more power hungry yet more powerful cpu, is for more cpu intensive things.

The only thing it implies (to me) is that windows is less suited to small & quick applications.

Re:Disagree with summary

[commodore64_love]

>>>AOL, McAffee, etc. all pay for "product placement".

So with Windows it cost around $100 to license from Microsoft, minus the dollars collected from AOL, et cetera paying to advertise their warez. Now with Linux it costs $0.00, minus the advertising dollars, which yields a net negative cost for the software. So overall a Linux PC should still be cheaper cost.

Who knows, with enough advertising maybe the PC could be free or almost-free, like those magazines I find in the grocery store.

Re:Disagree with summary

[commodore64_love]

>>>use windows for gaming, Powerpoint, MS office.

Linux does all of that. Well maybe not the gaming, but you can substitute OpenOffice for your presentations, database, and word processing.

Re:Disagree with summary

[commodore64_love]

>>>The only thing it implies (to me) is that windows is less suited to small & quick applications.

+1 insightful. I wonder which is faster, a small light OS on ARM processor, or a topheavy Vista OS on an Intel DualCore. I suspect it would be a tie.

Re:Disagree with summary

[eck011219]

Indeed -- I spend most of many days in Photoshop and InDesign. I could run them in a VM, but I hate to use up processor or memory for that when I could get it all for my apps.

I kept a Mac and a PC for a while, but since I do a lot of web development there were some tools I was more comfortable with in Windows. So my daughter has the Mac now (still around for the two or three times a year I need it) and I have an old box behind me running Kubuntu. I hate to wait for reboots, so I find that just having discrete machines for each OS is preferable if you can swing it. (Not that my main system, a laptop, doesn't dual boot, too -- you never know when you're going to need to escape Windows for a while.)

The only reason I haven't made the move to all Linux is the apps I need, not any kind of lack of power -- if I could run some of the stuff I need natively, I'd consider the switch.

Re:Disagree with summary

[Xtravar]

$100 - $20 - $20 - $40 - $30 = -$10

If they crap up your computer enough, OP is right. And I quite suspect that is the case.

Re:Disagree with summary

[Windows_NT]

not really: Everytime ive ever opened a word (Office 2008) doc in OOO, Its messed all the formatting up. You cannot create full access DBs and forms in OOO. im sure theres a tond more formats from the MS office suit that OOO doesnt handle. The big thing is people need to be able to handle a file format that everyone uses, which, unfortunately, is the MS format. Now dont get me wrong, i hate windows with a passion, but sadly enough i make my pay through MS products, and i an forced to do so, because open source cant do what MS apps can. There is no equivalent to :
MS office suit (OOO doesnt cut it)
MS SQL management studio
Visual Studio (.NET development)
IE for testing apps
And im sure there's people just like me that run proprietary software, that is only on windows (I run ESRI ArcGIS software)
As much as i love linux, the tools aren't there for developing the way I need.
THEREFORE: I wouldn't mind one of these laptops (although its not like my Dell inspiron doesnt allready have XP and slackware) because i am a slacker, and i still need Windows to make a buck. I think one of the bigger issues is, why would you want a pre installed Linux distro? Most likely what they give you wont be the distro you want (ubuntu or fedora) If they were to pre install with slack of BSD ... that would be a different sotry!

Re:Disagree with summary

[Xtravar]

Nevermind, ignore that. I fail reading comprehension.

Anyway it's probably chicken-egg syndrome. You can't sell virus scanners for Linux (yet), so why advertise them.

Re:Disagree with summary

[aonaran]

Did Cedega disappear since I last stopped caring about PC games when I bought a PS3?

Re:Disagree with summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, it just won the FSIRT PSOT FROEZN PEE summary award.

Re:Disagree with summary

[DAldredge]

Dell pays less than 40.00 per copy for the Windows license they ship with hardware such as this.

Re:Disagree with summary

[smoker2]

Anyway it's probably chicken-egg syndrome. You can't sell virus scanners for Linux (yet), so why advertise them.

Why sell them ? AVG free runs on linux, as does Avast, Fprot, Clam, and many others. Ok, they only scan mail AFAIK, but what else do you need. You can pay for updates with CLAM and Fprot IIRC.

Re:Disagree with summary

[Anonymous Coward]

No it's down. They ALREADY sell boxes with the same config with Ubuntu or Windows options, with Windows being around $30-35 more expensive. This includes them paying for a DVD decoder codec for Linux that's on the system, and also modem driver (it's $15 from Linuxant usually but Dell puts it on, I'm sure for much less than $15 a copy but more than $0.)

          The crapware I'm sure is helping cover the cost of Windows, but it's apparently only getting the cost down to like $40 or so given the above.
 

Re:Disagree with summary

[Anonymous Coward]

I enjoy free extras.

You're Dutch, right? ;-)

-- A Dutchie himself.

Re:Disagree with summary

[howlingmadhowie]

yeah, but that's not why dell's doing it.

dell and the other oems are pissed at microsoft for dictating their own business tactics for a decade. now with vista they have sensed blood in the water and are desperately trying strategies to further undermine microsoft's position.

Re:Disagree with summary

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just on Latitude models - part of Dell's business range. They come with hardly anything pre-installed (sometimes, yes, a bundled McAffee trial but nothing at all if you request it), certainly none of the AOL style crapware.

Dell's "business" Windows installs are some of the cleanest around.

Bassk askwards

[LittleLebowskiUrbanA]

Should read Linux for intensive tasks and Windows for Powerpoint.

Re:Bassk askwards

[Culture20]

You're currently marked funny. Really mods? Powerpoint and Outlook/Exchange are the last reasons to keep a windows box (when the rest of your company is using Windows). If your customers are using Windows, then Powerpoint is the sole reason.

Re:Bassk askwards

[Dunbal]

No, it's correct. Since Windows is so bloated, all task on windows (including the calculator) are hugely CPU intensive. Whereas if you want to run "intensive" tasks like encoding video or real number crunching, linux is your best bet.

Re:Bassk askwards

[Colonel Korn]

No, it's correct. Since Windows is so bloated, all task on windows (including the calculator) are hugely CPU intensive. Whereas if you want to run "intensive" tasks like encoding video or real number crunching, linux is your best bet.

Except openoffice's calc is a lot slower than excel at the 10 minute (on excel, 20 minute on calc) simple simulations I had to run in grad school. And no, the Windows Calculator is incredibly resource light and feels literally instantly responsive, just like Notepad and a million other little Windows tools.

Just because you want it to be different doesn't make it so.

Re:Bassk askwards

[Anonymous Coward]

Should read Linux for intensive tasks and Windows for Powerpoint.

OpenOffice.org Impress does PowerPoint. It should read "Linux for intensive tasks and Windows for GAMING."

Re:Bassk askwards

[LittleLebowskiUrbanA]

I don't know of a single widely used "slow" calculator on Linux.

Re:Bassk askwards

[MadMidnightBomber]

"If your customers are using Windows, then Powerpoint is the sole reason."

This is not entirely true. Some people are just fucking stubborn assholes.

I worked level 3 support, you know it's true, I know it's true.

Re:Bassk askwards

[Culture20]

I don't know of a single widely used "slow" calculator on Linux.

Define "slow". It sometimes takes me for freakin' ever to type something into expr, because I keep trying to use eval instead. Nowadays, I just grep history to see which does which. ;)

Re:Bassk askwards

[Dunbal]

Open office is not linux? What does open office have anything to do with it? There are at least a dozen OTHER spreadsheets available for linux too you know!

Re:Bassk askwards

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow.. I read that as "Linux for insensitive" tasks... you clod! ;-)

Another reason it won't fly is the price..

[Pvt_Ryan]

E4200 - £1200-£1800

http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/4x_latit_e4200?c=uk&cs=ukbsdt1&l=en&s=bsd

E4300 - £900-£1300

http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/4x_latit_e4300?c=uk&cs=ukbsdt1&l=en&s=bsd

Nothing new really

[Anonymous Coward]

This reminds me of the latest sony vaio p series. They got windows and dual boot with the play station operating system for quick tasks.
Linux would be a nice alternative, but I'm afraid they won't make it slim enough to boot as fast..

F11 [OT]

[camperdave]

My laptop came with some sort of diagnostic boot system which was launched by pressing F11 during the system startup process. Since converting to dual boot, that diagnostic system has disappeared. Is there a way to set up my system so that starting normally boots one OS, and starting with F11 boots another?

Re:F11 [OT]

[blahbooboo]

In my experience with Lenovo/IBM the "F11" button directs machine to a hidden partition on your disk. When you "converted to dual boot" you likely removed that partition. As to why the F11 prompt disappeared that is strange as that should be a part of your BIOS...unless your manufacturer placed something in the root of your drive...

Re:F11 [OT]

[camperdave]

No... Sorry, you misunderstood. The F11 prompt is still there. It just doesn't do anything anymore. The diagnostic partition must have accidentally got trashed somewhere along the line, as you say. I tried to be careful of that. In fact, there is still a 1M space at the start of the disk which gparted says is "unallocated".

Re:F11 [OT]

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes I think so. On many systems like this, the diagnostic (F11) just loads a partition off the hard disk. It's probably just tagged with a non-standard partition type. NORMALLY it boots into DOS with some apps on it, but I can't see why it couldn't just load something else instead.

          Regarding the partition type, running "l" command in fdisk shows some possible partition types. I would guess partition type 12 (Compaq diagnostic), or type DE (Dell Utility)

         

it's called negotiation R-tards

[Anonymous Coward]

This thing will soon cost exorbitantly more than a single-boot Windows version with higher specs. Why?

Maybe because that's Dell's reach-around after fucking Microsoft - which will end up selling Dell Windows licenses at 5 or 10 dollars a copy. Still better than losing its monopoly.

Bad for Linux

[Jahf]

The author seems to think that exposure to Linux here might convince people to leave Windows. I strongly disagree.

I used to be in technical marketing for a desktop Linux distro. People listen to the marketing message especially when it is negative. What does that mean? Well lets look at the implied marketing message that is given by this system:

"Linux is good enough for your quick tasks like firing off an email but you need Windows to do your heavy hitting."

ANY corporate non-techie is going to see that if they have to boot Windows to get their big tasks done they obviously don't want Linux on their main system.

Now let us think about the actual environment you get with each:

Linux - Arm processor ... limited applications. The non-techie won't know that they've been artificially limited by the laptop manufacturer. They're just going to know that "Linux is slow" and "I can't download new apps in Linux".

Windows - Intel processor ... full applications and no limit on downloading new software.

Seriously ... things like this are the WORST thing possible for getting the idea of Linux as a desktop replacement out to the mass market. They not only have to fight the current battles regarding custom apps not being written for them but they add artificial misperceptions about the limitations of Linux.

Sometimes no exposure -is- better than bad exposure. If you look only at the bullet points it is cool that a laptop is shipping Linux. And if you can keep your bosses from ever reading the parts about using Linux in a limited way (and NEVER let them touch one of these) then it would be good. But you can't. And you can't control the perception that Linux is limited once they start using it in a stunted environment like this.

Re:Bad for Linux

[what about]

It can also mean that Linux can do things that Windows cannot do, after all why putting Linux on a PC if you could do all of it with Windows ?
Maybe as you say, Microsoft has paid to have this gizmo produced to show Linux in bad light, it kind of make sense, but I would wait to see how things actually perform before killing it.
Anybody actually tryed it ?

Re:Bad for Linux

[NewbieProgrammerMan]

And if you can keep your bosses from ever reading the parts about using Linux in a limited way (and NEVER let them touch one of these) then it would be good. But you can't. And you can't control the perception that Linux is limited once they start using it in a stunted environment like this.

No doubt--it seems to me that most people rarely forget a bad experience with new things. Let them see Linux for their first time on this wacky machine, and they'll be telling their friends for the next 5 years that they "tried Linux and Windows on the same machine and Linux was slow as hell."

I suppose there's some awesome technical issue beyond my comprehension that would explain why I can't just run either OS on either processor. If anybody knows what it is, I'd love to hear about it.

Re:Bad for Linux

[Espinas217]

Now let us think about the actual environment you get with each:

Linux - Arm processor ... limited applications. The non-techie won't know that they've been artificially limited by the laptop manufacturer. They're just going to know that "Linux is slow" and "I can't download new apps in Linux".

I think the point of putting Linux to do quick tasks is that it can let you do those tasks faster, not slower. So even if they see Linux as the limited choice it should be the faster way of doing those tasks. Besides if people start actually using Linux they may discover two important things: the Windows way is not the only one nor the easiest one; and Linux is a usable OS for them.

Re:Bad for Linux

[drinkypoo]

I'm a non-corporate techie and I don't have Linux on my main system. Once I decided that I had to have Windows directly on the metal at any time, I had to jettison Linux. Why? Because pretty much anything I can do in Linux, I can do in Windows, and this way I don't have to multi-boot. Sure, Linux does many things BETTER than Windows, and if I need to attack a device with dd or something, I'm not running dd.exe. I'm plugging into one of my Linux systems. But for day to day use Windows will do everything, and if I need a bash shell or something there's cygwin. (I haven't figured out powershell yet and I hope never to have to.)

The simple fact is that multi-booting is annoying. Windows has a hard time reading Linux filesystems and Linux has a slow time reading NTFS, so you end up with files that you can't conveniently access from one OS or the other (or both) and having to bounce back and forth to move files around, et cetera. Every so often you add or remove some big waste of disk space and then you have to repartition and the most entertaining Linux filesystems can't necessarily be moved around conveniently, so you have to shuttle Linux off to another disk, repartition and resize Windows, then bring it back.

With all that said, a quick-booting mini-Linux distribution that booted into XBMC and with a couple of programs under the programs launch menu (like firefox, skype, etc) could be a great additional feature for a laptop, especially if it loaded from flash. Granted, I can do this myself by leaving something in my SD slot, but then I can't view photos from my camera in XBMC with autorun on insert. It could be a strong selling point on consumer-grade laptops which are marketed as a media player (glossy screen at. al.) I could also see a teensy linux web-only boot on a netbook that has windows installed - sometimes you just want to browse the damned web. And again, probably it should also have a SIP client and Skype.

You should be able to accomplish this in a pretty small footprint, tucked off in a corner of a flash drive. It could be a standard feature on 12GB and 16GB models which would never even notice the lack, and an optional install for others.

Re:Bad for Linux

[obarthelemy]

1- windows only runs on x86 systems nowadays
2- the linux in question is a ROM-based, ARM version, so it won't run on an x86. You can still install another , x86 linux, like on any PC.

Re:Bad for Linux

[viralMeme]

"ANY corporate non-techie is going to see that if they have to boot Windows to get their big tasks done they obviously don't want Linux on their main system"

"heavier duty" computing like running Microsoft Office applications"

Would Portable Office (86.4MB) run on such a system?

Re:Bad for Linux

[cL0h]

Technical marketing? What distro was that for? If you know anything about using a laptop on the go then you will know that by far the greatest limiting factor is battery life and this laptop offers the ability to type and do email on a full size keyboard with "ten times the battery life". There is no negative "implied marketing message" just because it is not full featured Linux. I see nothing but positives in the extra features offered on this laptop and any travelling business exec used to making do with a Blackberry until he can find a socket to recharge will appreciate this.

Re:Bad for Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you don't understand the mindset of the people who will actually use such a device. The issue the original poster was bringing up was not with the 1% people like you or pretty much anyone else on /. It was with the 99% of people who make up the market. You don't need to be convinced of the advantages of Linux and understand why this solution is limited. Everyone else does not.

Re:Bad for Linux

[xlotlu]

You might be interested in cooperative linux.

It's a linux kernel ported to run (natively) on windows. No virtualization.

Re:Bad for Linux

[palegray.net]

I suppose there's some awesome technical issue beyond my comprehension that would explain why I can't just run either OS on either processor. If anybody knows what it is, I'd love to hear about it.

The fact that Windows won't run on the ARM processor?

Re:Bad for Linux

[Teun]

Linux was put on this machine specifically because it is faster than a full blown Windows. You can say a lot about the technical skills of a PHB but he'll get the message when running it.

Besides, it won't just magically appear on his desk, he asked for it.

Re:Bad for Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, the "awesome technical issue" is the absence of an ARM port of NT7.

Linux is cross-platform, and could run on both platforms. Windows isn't, so you'll need to completely separate variants (Window Mobile and Windows NT7) to run it on either.

(Of course, you'll still have separate root filesystems for the two architectures, but they can both be the same distro, e.g. Debian, and have practically all the same apps available.)

Re:Bad for Linux

[JAlexoi]

I could also see a teensy linux web-only boot on a netbook that has windows installed - sometimes you just want to browse the damned web.

Hello! I am typing this message on my Lenovo IdeaPad S10e via the Quick Start(SplashTop Linux). It's not the future, it's the present. I also have an ASUS M/B with ExpressGate "instant on" Linux.

Re:Bad for Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

ARM versions of Vista are hard to find

Re:Bad for Linux

[hey!]

Oh, but marketing messages are like those pictures where you see one picture but then look at it again and it's another one altogether.

If you were trying to promote Linux this way, you'd be a moron to say Linux is for quick things and Windows for intensive things. You'd say, Linux is agile and efficient but you can have Windows too because they (The Man, you know) makes you.

But in any case promoting Windows is not what this is about. I don't know about Dell, but Asus doesn't even brand it's quickstart Linux environment as "linux". It'd probably be the kiss of death because IT or purchasing would have conniptions -- possibly both. It's all about getting to your email while you're waiting to board the plane sort of thing. Of course, that's what the God supposedly made Blackberries for, but there's something to be said for having a real browser on a real machine with a keyboard attached. Safari on the iPhone comes close, of course.

Still, if for some reason you're stuck on an island with wifi, and the tide is rising so quickly you're going to drown if you can't communicate, then it's kind of like security blanket to know you can have a complete, self-contained communication package at your fingertips in under ten seconds fro the get-go. Apparently that kind of scenario figures in some people's nightmares.

Re:Bad for Linux

[the linux geek]

It's not really relevant, but Windows also runs on Intel's Itanium architecture. Not just x86. So if someone wants to build an Itanium combination laptop/stove, they could put Windows on it.

Re:Bad for Linux

[Jahf]

"What distro was that for?"

Sun's "Java Desktop" system (yeah, I know, I know) which was based on SuSE.

I also did embedded Linux at MontaVista ... where we helped invent much of the instant-on on Arm technology that is starting to hit laptops.

Prior to that I was part of the Linux appliance world at Cobalt Networks.

(I no longer work professionally on Linux products, I moved to a networking software gig)

I've used laptops on the go for longer than you've probably been in the work force :) I use them today. Right now I run on everything from a Lenovo Thinkpad T61p (huge) to a HP 2133 mini netbook (small) to an iPhone and a Blackberry.

I'm quite familiar with the Linux on Laptop world, the embedded Linux world, and with the corporate types that make up most of the market of these devices who are still thinking Linux is something that won't do what they need every day.

You don't understand the point of my post. I'm not saying that the features offered are bad. I'm saying that people will equate the usage of Linux with "tasks that don't require horsepower" and with a system that is not geared to run anything but a few specific applications. You're correct that the features are nice. My point is that they won't in any way enhance the perception of Linux in the market place nor convince corporate folk to switch to Linux. Which is something the author of the original article mentioned he thought -would- happen.

YOU see nothing but positives ... but you are NOT the typical business user. And you probably aren't paid to understand how they look at things in relation to the product. I see cool features ... but ones that accidentally give the wrong impression about Linux to people who don't have savvy about the nuances here and who will not continue to invest their time into seeing if things change. First impressions last for years and years when it comes to things like this.

I don't feel that Dell is creating this impression on purpose ... I doubt they care much one way or the other. Doesn't change things. I know corp folks who saw Linux once 5 years ago and still assume that it is exactly the same today. That makes some sense since they are usually still using the same OS (XP) that they installed in 2001.

Re:Bad for Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows has a hard time reading Linux filesystems

I am using ext3 on my data partition, and Windows can read that with the ext2ifs drivers (and write to it too) -- works well whenever I do boot into XP (hardly ever).

Yes, yes they will...

[Comatose51]

"but will such a machine really fly in the business world?"

Yes, yes they will along with the chairs as soon as Balmer gets his hands on them.

Will it fly? Sure It Will

[Kozar_The_Malignant]

I've been doing this for years and through at least four laptops. It isn't that you reboot to change tasks, I pick which OS to boot depending on where I am and what I intend to do. Connect to internet through hotel or airport network: Linux. Quick review of stuff and make some notes for meeting on airplane: Linux. Connect to secure network either at work or at travel location: Windows. End of the day gaming session in hotel room: Windows. Data files are kept in the Windows partition, because Linux can mount that a whole lot easier than the other way 'round.

rather have....

[zogger]

...just the arm chip and linux on the laptop and skip the whole x86 and windows deal...for a hundred to two hundred bucks tops..and the os boots from a ssd and then runs from RAM.

Easily enhanced

[johnw]

Surely the obvious thing to do with this is to scrub Windows and install Linux on the other processor too. Then you can have low-power instant-on Linux for long battery life and quick tasks, then a fairly transparent transition to high power Linux when you want to do something requiring more grunt. It would be interesting to see whether you can have both running at the same time and communicating with each other.

Re:Easily enhanced

[i.r.id10t]

Interesting... share your home directory (diff partition) between the 2 oses, and you wouldn't even need to move settings around... Boot the ARM version for long battery life, boot the x86 side when you want lots of speed.

Why?

[abigsmurf]

Any linux distro able to do that would take around as long to boot as windows (depending on startup aps) which eliminates the point of having this kind of setup. Then you'd have to deal with the added drain on resources running a VM on top of another OS would have, both in terms of CPU and ram usage and in terms of battery life.

I Was A Dual-Booter

[aquatone282]

But now I run Ubuntu 8.0.4 in a VMWare server on top of Vista Home Edition (this all powered by an AMD-64 with 4GB RAM).

Works for my meager needs. I have access to the very few Windows-only apps I like (Quicken, iTunes) but I can use Linux for development and testing - at the same time. No more booting back and forth.

And with the NoMachine server and client, I can access the Linux desktop from the cube-farm.

Maybe not elegant, but it's cheaper than a Mac.

Linux is ready for business - Why use Windows?

[doodlebumm]

My Dell Latitude D820 is loaded up with Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex. My co-workers use Windows. Yesterday I got our department Sprint data card. They told me it would probably take me a bit to get it working on the laptop (because it took them a while to get the driver installed and setup to run). So I took the card and inserted it into the PCMCIA slot. In about 20 seconds (without my doing ANYTHING else) it was connected to Sprint's network and I was using it like the laptop was born to use it.

I use it for doing every task that I have to do for work. There are over ten thousand windows users here at work. We went through a big change from Groupwise to Exchange and Outlook. I use Evolution, and I get complete access to everything I need - scheduling, email, the works.

When people say that Linux is not ready for business use, they smoking somethin' that making them see the world in a false and distorted way. I'll never go back to Windows.

Re:Linux is ready for business - Why use Windows?

[Overzeetop]

Using Linux presumes that you can run all of your mission critical apps. In most technical fields, that's not the case. Thanks to the popularity of NT and the increases in power of desktops, most engineering apps have been exclusively ported to Windows, with the old Unix variants retired. Pro/E comes to mind right off the top. AutoCAD has never been *nix. Many FEM programs are also windows only now.

That said, I'm hoping this option trickles through the product lineup. I keep Dells in my shop because the apps I run require Windows and I only have to keep one OS install CD around and I never have to fiddle with licenses for the OS. I'm going to retire my Precision laptop next year, and I would love to have the option of an email/web subsystem with wicked long battery life.

Re:Linux is ready for business - Why use Windows?

[ignavus]

Your problem is that you cannot run any of the more frequently used Windows apps, like trojans, worms, viruses, etc.

When others are having unexplained system slowdowns, you are just locked out of the action, your PC sadly operating without being able to take on that extra work, like multitasking away as a spambot in its spare time.

Linux can't keep up with that. It will never be as versatile as Windows, never be so hospitable to strangers in need of a little spare processing power. Obviously Linux is anti-social.

Re:Will it fly? What do you mean win needs 4GB?

[davidsyes]

If Win 7 is any indication, win better NOT need more than 1GB. When SMART companies realize that Linux is running in under 1 GB with pretty decent response, and that Vista w/o any SP1 runs "so-so" to "ok" in VirtualBox, in a 2GB max system, then they should begin the next round of PUMMELING the hell out of ms.

For example, my laptop:

Gateway P-6301, 17-inch lappy with TWO HDD slots.
2GB RAM max, with 256 MB going to graphics

Mandriva Linux 2008.0, with use of under 300 MB... because
VBox i assigned 1.5 GB so win can have 128 MB video RAM
Vista runs so-so to ok, and i run AutoCAD 2008 (rarely, but it behaves well), Punch! ViaCAD (mostly), and other graphics intensive CAD software. I NEVER yet touched the Internet with vista, virtualized or natively!

Now,

Same laptop/same hardware

Mandriva 2009.0, with numerous updates.
Same virtual disk of VBox/Vista
Some kinks to work out, but overall, vista is still as fast as on Mdv 2008.

Why should windows require 8 GB, or even 4 GB?

Everyone's gettng the wrong idea here

[rlgura]

This is not both operating systems pre-installed. Dell is selling this as an "instant on" function that quickly boots to an embedded Linux desktop where you can access your local Outlook PST mailfile, some simple applications, and browse the web. I have a few of these already, but we're not licensed for the option, so it's limited and since we're not an Outlook/Exchange shop, not too useful for us....

Re:Everyone's gettng the wrong idea here

[praedor]

Hmpf. What a waste of linux hardcore capability. Just a means to use virus files, err, Outlook pifs?

What is needed is dump the windows from the HDD and use the ARM version of linux to run a tor node and even act as a firewall or what have you, and then use linux on the main processor for real work.

attack a device with dd or something ..

[viralMeme]

"if I need to attack a device with dd or something, I'm not running dd.exe"

you're kidding, I can't remember when I last needed to DD to read a device, unless you mean a floppy that Windows can't access ..

The simple fact is that multi-booting is annoying. Windows has a hard time reading Linux filesystems and Linux has a slow time reading NTFS, so you end up with files that you can't conveniently access from one OS or the other (or both) and having to bounce back and forth to move files around, et cetera

If multi-booting is annoying then why not stick to the one OS. Most any version of Linux can read NTFS straight out of the box and there are a number of solutions

Every so often you add or remove some big waste of disk space and then you have to repartition and the most entertaining Linux filesystems can't necessarily be moved around conveniently, so you have to shuttle Linux off to another disk, repartition and resize Windows, then bring it back

You're kidding, if you run out of space, then add a second harddrive and map that into /home and you've doubled your storage, all without having to 'shuttle Linux off to another disk'

"I can't view photos from my camera in XBMC with autorun on insert"

You're still kidding, inserting a camera and a dialog box pops up ..

Re:attack a device with dd or something ..

[drinkypoo]

you're kidding, I can't remember when I last needed to DD to read a device, unless you mean a floppy that Windows can't access ..

Obviously you don't do anything very interesting. When I want to make a backup of the 512MB IDE flash disk from inside my DT Research WebDT 360 to a plain image, I don't reach for Ghost. I mean, I could use some big complicated software package. Or I could just boot the system from a 4GB USB stick with Linux loaded on it, and then dd if=/dev/hda of=filename. Switch if and of and I can restore the backup. Want to really and truly erase the disk's labeling? Just dd /dev/zero over the first chunks of the disk.

It's not that you can't do this stuff on Windows; it's that you can't do it without additional software, most of which sucks a lot.

If multi-booting is annoying then why not stick to the one OS. Most any version of Linux can read NTFS straight out of the box and there are a number of solutions

You don't read so well, do you? NTFS on Linux is slow.

You're kidding, if you run out of space, then add a second harddrive and map that into /home and you've doubled your storage, all without having to 'shuttle Linux off to another disk'

"Just add more hardware"? What an idiot you are. P.S. My computer is a laptop.

You're still kidding, inserting a camera and a dialog box pops up ..

Uh, what I'm saying is that if I boot from an SD card, I can't take it out and pop my digital camera's card into the slot.

Please do not respond to any more of my comments if you are not willing to read them first.

Re:attack a device with dd or something ..

[smoker2]

You don't read so well, do you? NTFS on Linux is slow.

NO it isn't. I spend more time waiting for windows to draw the explorer window contents than I ever wait for linux to read the drive. Transfers are probably faster through linux too, but I haven't measured it.

I'm dual booting XP Pro 64 and Fedora 9 x86-64.

Uh, what I'm saying is that if I boot from an SD card, I can't take it out and pop my digital camera's card into the slot.

Err, quite a few live distros (F10, DSL, Ubuntu, etc) can copy themselves over and run completely from RAM so, Yes you can take the card out. Besides which, surely you could use a USB card reader.

Re:attack a device with dd or something ..

[irgu]

NTFS on Linux is slow.

Yes. And sadly FAT and ext3 is even slower. There can be many explanations for slowness, some are apparently explained on http://www.ntfs-3g.org/support.html#slow

Summary is bad (as usual)

[drsmithy]

The Linux install is actually running out of a little embedded ARM card, not the main system. Dell call it Latitude ON, and it's activated by a dedicated button near the power button.

Since suspending/hibernating (rather than sleeping) a Windows laptop usually means you got through much of the boot process anyway (where this thing can kick in), it *might* have some practical value.

Unfortunately I got my E4300 before Latitude ON was available, but I was under the impression that when it was finalised, I'd get the necessary upgrade for free.

Might have to give my Dell rep a call...

Re:Summary is bad (as usual)

[Sigg3.net]

That's what we were told as well. Then the Engineering hault due to a chipset problem with the 43 came up, and we ordered some 42s. All you had to do was to provide your password for e.mail access. Minus any attachment (probably don't want to be embarrassed by Microsoft's proprietary formats). I haven't tried it yet, and I'd like to see how it does different profiles and handles encryption in the windows area.

Seeing X's little x cursor on bootup made me all giddy inside. I've been trying to get there users to use linux for ages, with only 2 successes, so splashtop may be the way to go. Unless linux gets branded as small, fast and only for surfing..

Licensing could be an issue.

[RulerOf]

I don't know exactly how it works, but COA/OEM licenses of Windows may not be allowed to be installed in a VM.

VLK licenses of XP, for example, can only be installed on computers that came with an XP OEM license.

Re:Licensing could be an issue.

[morgan_greywolf]

I don't know exactly how it works, but COA/OEM licenses of Windows may not be allowed to be installed in a VM.

I don't know about the EULAs for OEM VLK licenses, but if you have an OEM licensed copy from a manufacturer like Dell, the product key is tied to and stored in the BIOS. Meaning that the OEM copy will not work in a VM.

Corporate edition CDs work just fine. Its an open question whether or not a legitmately licensed copy of XP or Vista from Dell can be run with, say, a corporate license key, running in a VM on the same machine the OS is licensed for. I don't know what the legalities are, but this is exactly what I do and Microsoft can go fsck themselves they think I'm going to purchase a retail copy just to run an OS I already legitimately paid for in a VM on the physical machine that it was purchased for.

Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[yet-another-lobbyist]

I once thought this "Dual-Hibernate" (suspend-to-disk) was a great idea. However, I ran into real trouble as soon as I wanted to exchange data between the two partitions. Trying to mount an NTFS partition in Linux that was left hibernated by Windows can create a real mess. More generally, think of file systems in which you do not really have control at what time the data is actually physically written onto the disk. Having all the data on a third partition that is unmounted before hibernating in either of the two OSs could work, though.

I have no idea how a "Dual-Suspend" would work if you mean "suspend-to-RAM"! How can you even start the other OS while one is in suspend? How do you tell each OS to only use a part of the memory?

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[Clarious]

If you are talking about suspend to disk then I don't think it is 'dual hibernate'/hybrid, hybrid suspend is saving information to both disk and ram so you can resume faster, and won't lost all the work if run out of power.

And for the mounting problem, I just make a ext3 partition and store all the things that need to be shared between two OSes, then install ext2ifs so windows can read them.

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[Tenebrousedge]

I would presume that he meant that he had Windows installed in a VM. That would not presumably have any more issues with S3 than any other program.

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[mgblst]

When the OS gets suspended to Ram, it is a trivial process to move this to the hdd. So that is not a problem.

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[hitmark]

iirc, windows is designed around the assumption that its the sole os of a computer.

so when it hibernates, it leaves things in all kinds of silly states, and/or assume that things will be exactly the same when it comes back out of said state.

giving linux, or some other os, a spin in the meantime can lead to "interesting" errors.

this is similar to why anything NT related will give you a real hard time if you move the drive between controllers/motherboards.

rather then dropping to a more generic driver, it will give you a complaint, potentially requiring you to do a "repair" and then a reinstall of all service packs and patches not slipstreamed to your install media...

there is a reason why im glad to see the linux output scroll by, going over the hardware, as i know its not assuming anything, just to allow for a quicker boot.

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[irgu]

Trying to mount an NTFS partition in Linux that was left hibernated by Windows can create a real mess.

No, it can not. Read-only mount is allowed but read-write mount is refused unless the 'remove_hiberfile' mount option is specified.

Microsoft designed hibernation in mind for the case when the hibernation file must be removed and they ensure that the filesystem remains consistent. They didn't do it for Linux interoperability but for themself when they are not able too boot otherwise.

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[cthulhu11]

I have VMware Fusion on my MBP, paid a whopping $29 for it. It runs an M$WXP virtual machine perfectly when I'm compelled to use it (mainly ILOM's console redirection for firmware updates) and shared files live on the host filesystem. I don't see any appeal to a dual-boot scenario that's precarious to setup and maintain. I've read lots of stories over the years of one OS's setup trashing the other's, and it's a pain to have to partition the disk and only have one running at a time.

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[hawk]

I did this for years dual-booting FreeBSD & Linux.

Neither played nice with the other's file system. I think it was that linux dumped random things into the middle of files on a ufs file system when mounted rw, while FreeBSD did weird things to stab entries of ext2 partitions, but I might have it backwards (If you really care, search for my questions from the late '90s).

The solution was to keep a FAT partition around, and trade files through tarballs.

I'm still stuck with both, but once Linux seriously supports ZFS, or FreeBSD can use up to date flash, I'm going to just one . . . (or maybe make an opensolaris nfs server to run zfs, with a lot of rsyncing).

hawk

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate"

[badkarmadayaccount]

Tell that to M$, damn, even Apple has been doing this for ages...

I've only been using Linux for...

[Anonymous Coward]

I've only been using Linux exclusively for 9 years, or so. I am really glad someone finally pointed out that I can't actually get any work done in it and that in order to do any work I need Windows.

Now, who is going to break this to the fortune 500 companies, governments, schools and thousands of other organizations using Linux and FOSS?

rebooting is a chore ..

[viralMeme]

Rebooting is a chore. Once people start up, they don't want to shut down to start up another application

They why do I have to reboot my Windows machine after a few hours of browsing or playing a video without getting 'windows is running low on virtual memory' messages, never mind letting it switched on over night ..

Re:rebooting is a chore ..

[Anonymous Coward]

Because you're still running Windows [19]98, fool. Check a calendar.

Re:rebooting is a chore ..

[viralMeme]

No, it's XP with 512MB ... curiously enough Yoper running on the same machine has no such problems ..

Oblig.

[Erikderzweite]

I, for one, welcome our ariborne dual-booting overlords.

Linux on the Desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

2009 will [finally] be the year of Linux on the desktop! W00t.

Re:Linux on the Desktop

[edraven]

This is a laptop, though.

Good for Linux

[transporter_ii]

When Windows is hosed up from the latest virus/trojan/malware and Linux is the only thing that works...it will be good for Linux.

Funny

[slashdotlurker]

Linux for light tasks and windows for heavier ones ?? Yeah, right.

Information Security

[TechHSV]

Information Security hates dual boot. You would need to update two different systems. Since most updates are pushed, the OS that doesn't get booted will be deficient.

So delete the Windows partition and...

[yoshi_mon]

1. Nuke the Win partition.
2. Setup Linux to run on ARM when using batteries, x86 when plugged in. (Yeah yeah, a reboot may be required to switch modes.)
3. Watch as you have nice long battery life as well as good power when you need it.
4. Profit!

my laptop dual boots too

[bugs2squash]

I have near instant-on access to an OS called "BIOS".

Now if only it ran the apps I (mostly) want on the plane.

- play music / watch video
- a pen-notepad I can doodle on and write notes
- a PDF reader to review presentations, spreadsheets and to read books.
- browse websites when that's allowed inflight.

Perhaps it would have a full-sized screen inside and a cut down screen and keyboard that could be accessed when it was closed. Or a flip around touchscreen with a virtual keyboard.

Hold On

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe this is the new InstantOn feature that several of Dell's new Latitude lines offer. Basically, there are 2 power buttons. The power button boots your laptop to Windows or whatever you have installed on the hard drive. The InstantOn button boots from some small, solid-state storage/rom onboard...that quickly boots a very customized linux environment. The design goal is let you instantly have access to the web.

Option

[Anonymous Coward]

They should use VMWare ESXi for free & then put linux & Windows on it. my2 cents

Re:Will it fly? Sure It Will

[Teun]

Mounting an ext2/3 partition from Windows is completely transparent and not any harder than a FAT or NTFS one.

The real question is...

[lefiz]

will it blend? http://www.willitblend.com/videos.aspx?type=unsafe&video=iphone

Can they DO that?

[jonadab]

Won't Microsoft revoke their OEM licensing agreements or something?

clearly aimed at business travelers?

[ClosedSource]

Sure, because when you think of customers who want Windows and Linux on one machine, business travelers are the first group that comes to mind.

Re:clearly aimed at business travelers?

[El_Oscuro]

Thats pretty much what I got, a Dell business laptop with XP and Ubuntu. Except it is not dual boot - Windows runs under Ubuntu as an application with Win4Lin. Ubuntu for all *nix related jobs, as well as all games and browsing. Windows for anything specifically requiring it.

Re:clearly aimed at business travelers?

[ClosedSource]

So you're a business traveler?

This is great.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad they're doing this. It makes it easier for those of us who just set up a dual-boot system after we get the PC. I'm surprised M$ will let them get away with this though. I seem to recall them trying to force Vorbis off of MP3 players to be "playsforsure" certified.

Linux Open Office

[Nom du Keyboard]

My question is: can you run Open Office on the Linux side? Modern systems (e.g. Core 2 Duo) are way overkill for even most Microsoft Office tasks. If you have a lean, quick booting, OO ready and able to go is fully booting into Windows and firing up MSOffice really necessary? How quickly might people learn that the few extra features that MSOffice does provide aren't features they really ever neeeded in the first place? Since the cost of testing this out comes in at the low low cost of Free, why not give it a spin if it's possible to fit it into the Linux partition in the first place?

One problem...

[Anonymous Coward]

When windows crashes and screws up the file system on the HDD you can't run chkdsk to straighten it out because the boot loader won't let chkdsk run. After 20 or 30 crashes, windows will not work worth a crap and you'll be running linux only, full time.

They got this 180 bassackwards

[praedor]

They goofed. For heavy lifting, you want linux, for light tasks, you use windows. That is how they work and how they are designed.

LINUX does heavy sh*t, windows does games and recipes, etc.

Re:They got this 180 bassackwards

[ClosedSource]

What sort of "heavy sh*t" are business users going to do on a laptop?

Re:Will it fly? What do you mean win needs 4GB?

[davidsyes]

Jesus H. Christ. What kind of person would mark me troll and be allowed to KEEP me as Troll?

Damn it, NOTHING IN THAT POST WAS FALSE, INTENTIONALLY FALSE, OR LIBELOUS!

My laptop is a Gateway P-6301. It was SOLD with only 1 GB RAM, bought by me at Best Buy, late Dec 2007. I bought the upgrade RAM at CompUSA in Jan/Feb 2008. I downloaded demos OF and later paid for licenses TO of Punch! ViaCAD and IMSI TurboCAD. I installed VirtualBox on the machine because it was pointless to install Win4Lin, and because the damned machine came with Vista.

I NEVER TO THIS DAY let that vista touch the Internet natively and not via VirtualBox. THE ONLY TIME I surf using windows is at work, between tasks. But when on lunch, i break out my laptop so people near and around can see Linux (Mandriva) and KDE4.1 in play.

Now, you troll-marker out there, you are the kind of person who makes it fortunate that duelling is illegal in the US. (This is NOT an invite, nor a threat, but laws keep in check those of us who'd blow a gasket at being marked as troll by YOU because YOU cannot handle the truth, and seem incapable of allowing that someone's word is actually true and unassailable.)

If troll-markers were required to monkey-click tick boxes indicating they searched for and read their targ... vict... subject's related posts, you would have found out that in no fewer than 3 or 4 times i talked about my laptop, it's make and model, what i do with it, and more. (Doesn't /. have a powerful search engine? Why are "troll" marks allowed to post without forcing the mod to jump hoops first? Posting or sharing a story is more difficult than condemning someone to troll status...)

It is NOTHING SHORT OF PATHETIC, though, that Slashdot hasn't fully tapped the power of limiting the power of troll-markers.

Anybody out there care to weight in and show the troll-marker s/he cannot get away with this?

Just a little bit more....

I also want to reiterate that Slashdot is partly at fault for allowing this kind of behavior on the part of troll-markers to occur because instead of using a histogram of scoring/grouping of users' comments, it only shows the latest/last. If things were displayed as historical, then readers could personally assess, visually, whether or not a post is being victimized or assailed by grousers who have no other way of nailing people like me. But, then, such grousers/troll-markers are allowed to get away with hit-and-run/broadside down-scoring, possibly just to piss off people like me who 99.999999999% of the time stay well within the law, but who will at least verbally retaliate --because going further than that is too damn risky...

So, once again, Slashdot admins, Slashdot code could do us all a favor by making troll-markers a thing of the past, or by exposing these hit-n-run moderators. Anyone who marks someone a troll should be flagged as foe, automatically and irrevocably. Anyone who is a habitual foe could or should find their account suspended, or publicly down-rated, and every time they become a foe, every one of their targets should be spiral-graphed so people can know to rescue victims (after all, we humans like to say we are mostly good, kind, benevolent... sure, sure we are...). Usually, though, collectively, /. regulars can automatically by memory ignore or punish anyone who regularly hollers or horns along on a daily, nauseating pattern, but at the same time, with impunity, troll-markers can comfortably slam targets and never be found out or forced into a "cooling-off" period.

Finally...

One day, i dare assert, some geek here will lose his/her cool, sleuth out their victim, and then hunt him/her down and make headlines. I hope that, should that day come, /. will take its share of the blame (rather than letting persist the "let them eat cake" status quo) and indicate it willfully chose not to implement histograms and cooling-off periods. Marking someone a troll should blatantly require the marker to JUSTIFY it

Rebooting is a chore.

[falconwolf]

if this were done as a VM where the Linux machine were to boot and they installed Windows XP in a VirtualBox or some other VM, then that might be acceptable. Then they would have their safer, virus-free environment for email and web browsing and then a VM to host the applications they need to run. This stuff works really well.

You could do both dualboot and use a VM. That's what I want to do. I have Leopard on my Mac but I've been thinking about installing Ubuntu on it as well to dualboot. If so I'll also want to install VMs in each OS so I can run both at the same tyme.

Falcon

Re:Will it fly? What do you mean win needs 4GB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have issues much?

dualbooting

[falconwolf]

Worse than rebooting is maintaining two separate configurations. For example, if you use an email client, you configure it on both sides. Browser, same thing. And so on.

If you use the same apps in both operating systems it's not hard to synchronize data files such as email and browsers. I though it was hard myself, however after some research I found out it can be easy to do. I have a MacBook Pro that runs Leopard and I've been thinking of installing Ubuntu to dualboot. What you do, er what I'll do if I install Ubuntu, is setup 3 partitions. One partition for each OS and the third as the user folder or directory. My browser is Firefox and using the profile manager in each OS you can tell Firefox where to put the Firefox user folder, so put it on the user partition in the same folder. Do the same with email, set Thunderbird to use the same folder in both OSes. Here's a webpage from Lifehacker on to Use a Single Data Store When Dual Booting. And here how to use Mozilla's Profile manager.

If you want to dualboot, or if you already do, I hope this helps.

Falcon

Re:dualbooting

[x78]

Would definately work better yeah, not sure about easier though. Unless as you say, you plan in advance and set up a common-grounds partition.
May just do this myself next time I decide to try out a different distro!

Re:dualbooting

[falconwolf]

Would definately work better yeah, not sure about easier though. Unless as you say, you plan in advance and set up a common-grounds partition.

Well, you should plan in advance. As I said earlier I'm thinking about dualbooting my Mac with Leopard and Ubuntu. Not being proficient or that knowledgeable I've been doing research on how to set it up the way I want. I made a list of things I'd like, such as being able to access user files in both OSes and synchronizing browsers and email. Then as I'd like to be able to use one OS while I'm in another without rebooting I'm looking at using a virtual machine that can run one OS that's already installed in a second OS.

I'm putting all this together in a document I'll print out before I start the process, that way I'll have the info I need, including what to do if something goes wrong.

Falcon

dualbooting

[falconwolf]

Not necessarily, if you are using cross platform applications then you can just often copy accross the configs. It may take a little effort but still, saves doing the initial configuring more than once!

It can be easier than that, check my reply to GP's post on how to do it.

Falcon

Re:Will it fly? I'll attest to that, too.

[davidsyes]

You are so correct. I, too, suspend my Mandriva 2008.0 disk (5,400 RPM) which has vista running in VirtualBox. Suspend works like a charm.

However, in my Mandriva 2009.0 (with updates) disk (7,200 RPM) with VirtualBox, i still have to tweak things as Vbox and my image are probably still saying hello to each other.

But, what IS VERY NICE is that now, when i suspend Mandriva, it takes about 15 seconds to suspend, vice the previous longer time. On wakeup/resume, it's about 10 seconds, vs the previous near-boot-like time of over 40-50 seconds. This, all on Gateway P-6301 hardware with only 2 GB (it maxes out at 2GB) RAM. I give VirtualBox 1.5 GB of the total system RAM, and of that, 128 MB (the max VBox allows) for graphics RAM. That means Linux is down to about ~300 MB RAM, and it runs a far sight better with bells and whistles than Vista Home Premium does.

Let's see... And Win7 is essentially the UAC-toned/stripped, and OS-stripped-of-many-things to get it down to acceptable performance speeds (perceived or real), and i have all manner of servers, services, firewalls, and apps running in that 256 MB of RAM, but if I take Vista down to less than 1GB of RAM, with my drawings open, vista crawls....

Counting OS shipments

[ignavus]

Maybe Dell wants to renegotiate their contract with Microsoft, and this scare will improve their bargaining power.

"So, Mr Ballmer, that's a nice desktop monopoly you have. Pity if anything were to happen to it."

Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate" Duel and WIN.

[davidsyes]

uname -a on my machine produces:

Linux mylappy 2.6.27.10-desktop586-1mnb #1 SMP Thu Jan 29 10:40:00 EST 2009 i686 Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPUT2310 @ 1.46GHz GNU/Linux

That kernel works nicely for suspend to RAM. When used the generic Mandriva laptop kernel, suspend to disk and suspend to ram utterly failed. In my prev install of Mdva (2008.0), suspend to RAM worked, but not suspend to disk. I cannot recall which kernel i have on that disk boot of Mdv 2008.0

So, you may want to visit your repository, get all the updates, download numerous power managers so you can experiment, and then repatch/reupdate. It doesn't hurt, either, to download and install multiple kernels and check them out, desktop or laptop. Notice again that I'm using the Desktop kernel. Lately, however, Mandriva seems to be of the position that Desktop is just fine for laptops, and my lastnight's experience bears that out. So, i will remain on the Desktop kernel.

You might also -- if you are using the KDE4.1/Compiz and Plasma widgets -- want to be sure to get all the Plasma widgets for networking and KDE. After i did that i noticed some really nice notification tray icon activity/color-changing/flashing to alert me to port scanning, network status and so on. They look really nice.

Also, note: i did NOT do anything special with partitions such as designate anything for suspend to disk. That MIGHT be part of my problem. But, i don't mind suspend to RAM, since before i suspend, i save every changed file that i care about.

Oh, and yep, win vista resumes fine because while i suspend Mandriva, windows never (i think it never) really "suspends". I don't surf with it, so pretty much nothing wakes it up enough to provoke Mandriva to awaken. Even adding and removing USB devices, power... none of that wakes my laptop, so i am glad i read through virtually EVERY SINGLE FILE that i saw listed in PLF and Mdv's sites in my RPM manager. Regrettably, the descriptions are short, some often ludicrously useless in wording. But, at least great functionality becomes possible if all the right files are onboard.

GOOD LUCK!

Not quite!

[BCW2]

Sounds like my desktop to a point. If XP is running, I'm playing a game. All serious work is done on Linux. Security does count and Windows has none so has been relegated to games only.

I am your mythical beast.

[Orbijx]

My preference is largely non-financial.
I make no money off people who have viruses.
The few Windows users who I have helped with a virus issue, I did for fun, not profit.

My background isn't largely technical. I started on the old Apple IIc systems, migrated through Apple up to around System 5 or System 7 (can't quite remember), then was forced to jump over to Microsoft and Windows 3.11 for Workgroups. Progressed up through there to Win95 (Argh), 98 (ARGH), ME (... *dead*), 2000 (Heal'd!), XP, and finally Vista, while walking back over to the Apple side of the line for OS8, OS9, and the code-cat-named latest Apple OS.

Through all of that migration, I also spent some time in 'foreign lands', such as Debian Linux (back in 1998), QNX, BeOS (when it was marked as dead), Slackware, and other ports east.

Strange as it may seem, I would rather have Windows on my systems. I don't want to have to come home each night and figure out why a game that was working a day ago suddenly won't work. I don't want to figure out why the damn OS keeps setting the gamma so high that the colors are washed out, but will reset them once I open the nVidia applet in Eww-buntu.

I just want to come in after spending 13 hours of my day on work and commute, and play a game or two without figuring out why the graphics are broken up or won't display. It's hard to enjoy the evening beer when you're sitting there, poring over search results as to why you can't make this game work.

Largely, all of these OSes 'just work', but some of them 'just work' better than others.
For example, my word processing needs are basic, so I don't need Office OR OpenOffice. Google Docs works well enough for me, since I go between multiple computers. Therefore, I don't have a problem with Windows coming without a major word processing app. It's not needed, and I view it as bloat when it's included, no matter who made the app.

(Before anyone tells me that I could do some sort of virtualization voodoo, know now that I lack interest in it. Most of my hardware is too old to make that worthwhile -- it has trouble running one OS sometimes, compared to a couple of OSes grinding their little blue nubs on each other's laptops.)

it won't work.

[falconwolf]

People will boot to the 1st OS (as they don't want to select one and they will get annoyed if the 1st OS in the boot menu is not windows because they won't be able to leave the computer unattended to boot.

PCs can be left to bootup Linux, or another OS, so you're wrong about that. I have an old PC that dualboots Windows and Linux and it is setup up automatically boot Windows after 15 seconds, I think but don't recall how long, if an OS is not selected. I may setup my Mac to dualboot as well, and if I do I'll set it up to boot into Leopard if an OS is not selected after 30 seconds. I will be able to push the power button then walk away and let it bootup on it's own.

Falcon

Re:it won't work.

[Pvt_Ryan]

I am not "wrong" as you put it. All I was saying was if windows is not the default boot option it will confuse and annoy people.

I have no problem with dual booting, infact all my home PCs are dual boot.

Worked for Kaypro

[Anonymous Coward]

Kinda for a little while.

For those that remember CP/M vs DOS

First done 25 years ago...

[bgarcia]

Reminds me of my old Commodore 128. It had a MOS Technologies CPU for the main processor, and a Z80 CPU for running old CP/M programs.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

But will there be a version with only the ARM cpu? I sure would love such a thing.

Re:Will it fly? What do you mean win needs 4GB?

[morgan_greywolf]

Relax. Your poast was probably not totally trollish, but definitely flamebait. (Yes, I distinguish the two.) Basically you came off as a yet another Linux zealot beating on Microsoft about Vista and Windows 7.

Keep in mind that while Linux distros may run fine with 1 GB of RAM or less, start adding stuff that runs all the time you'll be needing more just like on Vista.

While I'm a bit of Linux fanboy myself, I do tend to take a more ecumenical approach and I do realize that there are folks on here that need or prefer to use Windows. (And even as a fanboy, I admit there are things I need Windows -- for instance, some of the software I write needs to be able to run on Windows and POSIX platforms equally well.) And that's okay. Life is full of choices. Just because someone might not agree with your choices doesn't mean they're stupid.

Is This Good For Linux, Or Harmful?

[scdeimos]

I'd usually applaud any OEM's decision to sell their kit with Linux installed, but I'm seriously questioning whether this particular implementation style is going to help Linux or not.

Why?

PHB's, that's why. Already articles like the one linked to are setting-up Linux as a "light duty OS" by saying things like:

The Linux OS provides a quick boot for checking email and other "light" computing duties while the Windows side allows "heavier duty" computing like running Microsoft Office applications.

Taken out of context that's a complete load of crap, but it's something Microsoft must be just loving to see.

You and I would understand that, in this case, it's because Linux is installed and running on an ARM-based subsystem with less memory and less bandwidth to play with, but PHB's will get this light-duty reference stuck in their heads. And this will be reinforced when they try to do something "difficult" with it, and it happens slowly or not at all, and they'll come away thinking "Linux is crap" when they really should be thinking "Windows is crap, why does it need so many resources?"

Why should I care? Because it's the PHB's, unfortunately, that sign the cheques to get new hardware and if they get the wrong ideas about Linux then Microsoft with their Windows and other software will continue to dominate the market.

Why couldn't Dell just quick boot into Linux and then run Windows apps under Wine, or even VM the whole Windows installation? :(

Bullshit

[Godji]

WTF? Linux is at least as capable of intensive tasks as Windows is. No BSODs either.

Re:Will it fly? Sure It Will

[Aldenissin]

I disagree, with Ubuntu I don't have to do anything anymore. With Windows, I have to install a driver that ultimately borked my system and I had to repair install Windows. But even that was still off and I still ended up completely reinstalling.

Isn't that backwards?

[stanjam]

Linux for quick tasks and Windows for more complex ones? Isn't that a bit backwards? Should it not be Windows for proprietary tasks, and Linux for everything else, such as complex tasks?

Why x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not just abandon the x86 line of processors for netbooks and use ARM CPUs clocked at a decent frequency? Then you get low power *and* flexibility without rebooting.

Why? Because Windows can't be compiled for ARM. Monopoly fail.

Dual boot on laptops is overdoing it a bit

[JesseMcJ]

Honestly, most of the business travelers using a laptop who truly are not "tech" people, have enough trouble using one OS, let alone, two or three. Using either Ubuntu or Red Hat with full install, OpenOffice is capable of getting real office work done, even on the road. However, if their employer used Microsoft Office with several macros that are not readable by other brands of office software, then have them just get Vista enterprise or Vista Ultimate (they are still not as secure as Linux or OSX, but they are better than the lesser versions of Windows.) This will not use up as much IT training and support time for the user, and will not use as much hard drive space. For many non-tech end-users, dual-boot machines just cause nearly as many problems as not having it. Several cannot even tell the difference between Gnome, Finder/Aqua, Explorer, and KDE desktops in the first place, and don't know the difference between MacOS, Linux, and Windows. This laptop will appeal to us techs who are probably already dual or triple-booting our computers, but this makes only a little sense for non-tech business users. And for running VMWare/Parallels, whether using MacOS paired with either Linux or Windows, or using Windows paired with Linux is also the source of a lot of tech-support headaches when dealing with non-tech business and consumer users. VMWare makes a lot of sense for more technical uses and server-side and cross-platform development projects, but for non-tech end-users, is fraught with stability and useability issues. Besides Linux, MacOS, and Windows are all capable of "heavy duty" computing, if used on a machine that is capable and configured well.

Re:Will it fly? What do you mean win needs 4GB?

[davidsyes]

I probably come off looking like a zealot, true. But, part of it is driven by the constant abuse by microsoft and other software vendors who just KEEP ON CONSUMING resources, as if to defeat Moore's Law.

I am running Win Vista inside of VirtualBox OSE. People seem to report VMs helping apps run faster than on native. one would expect that having heard this, ms of all software vendors would have (maybe they did this in w7?) virtualized windows even on native hardware just for the speed gains.

Someone else here mentioned being concerned that suspended machines might interfere with each other on resume/wake. I haven't had that problem. Admittedly, i've never run Linux inside windows, but i might for the sake of demoing to some Korean friends of mine looking to learn alternatives to windows.

But, it simply isn't fair for someone to have power to nail flamebait or troll on a comment if the comment lends itself to reproducibility. If anyone or enough people can attempt to reproduce my scenario and can refute, then more power to them. But, i am sick of slashdot not having a check/balances method of outing abusers who can't tolerate the fact that people will be emotionally charged with the relating of their own, undeniable personal experiences.

I am still wondering where the guy who troll-modded me is. The whole thread jesting ms' store plans probably has him/her in a thrombosis. Collectively, that thread is far more intense than what i wrote.

Re:Will it fly? Sure It Will

[Teun]

Weird, I have ext2ifs installed on several XP and Vista systems without any problem what so ever.

Last year there were compatibility issues with Truecrypt that would result in a BSOD but the latest versions have fixed this, maybe that's what you suffered?

How about only ARM?

[Gothmolly]

I'd love an ARM laptop running Linux - where can I get one? 12 hour battery life here I come !

MS change?

[slapout]

It was my understanding that this wasn't possible before because Microsoft wouldn't allow oems to do it. Has this changed?

dualboot

[falconwolf]

I am not "wrong" as you put it.

As you said "they won't be able to leave the computer unattended to boot", you are wrong. I can leave my old PC to boot on it's own without a problem.

Falcon

Re:dualboot

[Pvt_Ryan]

By default when I install ubuntu on to a vista laptop Ubuntu is the default OS to boot to.

I didn't say it couldn't be changed nor did I say it wouldn't. I simply stated that assuming the user was to be prompted at boot time which OS. Then windows would need to be the factory default or users (by users i mean the non-technical users) will get annoyed.

Re:dualboot

[falconwolf]

I didn't say it couldn't be changed nor did I say it wouldn't.

I didn't say you did say it couldn't be changed.

I simply stated that assuming the user was to be prompted at boot time which OS. Then windows would need to be the factory default or users (by users i mean the non-technical users) will get annoyed.

Since I used NT4 more than I used Redhat on my dualboot PC NT4 was the default OS and if an OS was not chosen at boot tyme it would automatically boot into NT4 after 15 seconds. I only had to tend to it if I wanted Redhat, and then I didn't even have to wait a minute before the boot manager came up. The actual boot process after the OS was chosen took longer than the boot manager did.

Falcon