Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Dell Selling Dual-Boot Laptops

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the hey-wait-a-minute dept.

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?"

54 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. Will it fly? by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Will it fly? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 5, Funny

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

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    2. Re:Will it fly? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

      --
      My blog
    3. Re:Will it fly? by jandersen · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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.

    4. Re:Will it fly? by nickruiz · · Score: 2, Informative

      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.

    5. Re:Will it fly? by dokebi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, articles before post read *you*!
    6. Re:Will it fly? by LDoggg_ · · Score: 2, Informative

      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.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    7. Re:Will it fly? by columbus · · Score: 2, Informative

      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.

      --
      friends don't let friends teleport drunk
    8. Re:Will it fly? by chebucto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

      --
      The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
    9. Re:Will it fly? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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'.

      --
      My blog
    10. Re:Will it fly? by onefriedrice · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

      --
      This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
    11. Re:Will it fly? by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

    12. Re:Will it fly? by chaim79 · · Score: 4, Informative

      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.

      --
      DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
      AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
      Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
    13. Re:Will it fly? by kimvette · · Score: 5, Funny

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

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    14. Re:Will it fly? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    15. Re:Will it fly? by causality · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    16. Re:Will it fly? by vux984 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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.

    17. Re:Will it fly? by Jurily · · Score: 2, Funny

      Rebooting is a chore.

      Yeah, have it crash randomly.

    18. Re:Will it fly? by SnarfQuest · · Score: 4, Funny

      But, will it blend?

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    19. Re:Will it fly? by Teun · · Score: 2, Informative

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

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    20. Re:Will it fly? by arth1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      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.

    21. Re:Will it fly? by JAlexoi · · Score: 2, Informative

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

    22. Re:Will it fly? by lmfr · · Score: 4, Informative

      ntfsfix is the equivalent fsck.ntfs

      It comes in the package ntfsprogs.

    23. Re:Will it fly? by causality · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  2. I could see this making sense by muppetman462 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:I could see this making sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    2. Re:I could see this making sense by erroneus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

  3. Good Idea but by Pvt_Ryan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Good Idea but by bendodge · · Score: 2, Informative

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

      --
      The government can't save you.
  4. Isn't this a dupe? Not just dual boot... by argent · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  5. Dupe? by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

  6. Bassk askwards by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 4, Funny

    Should read Linux for intensive tasks and Windows for Powerpoint.

    --
    This guy is way out there
  7. Re:Disagree with summary by i.r.id10t · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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?

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  8. Re:Disagree with summary by Windows_NT · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    --
    Go go Gadget Nailgun!
  9. Re:Disagree with summary by DrSkwid · · Score: 2, Funny

    Where intensive == booting windows and running Norton AV

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  10. Bad for Linux by Jahf · · Score: 5, Interesting
    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.

    --
    It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
    1. Re:Bad for Linux by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

      --
      [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
    2. Re:Bad for Linux by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. Re:This is new? by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Interesting

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

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  12. Yes, yes they will... by Comatose51 · · Score: 2, Funny

    "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.

    --
    EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
  13. Re:Honestly by zappepcs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    --
    Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
  14. Re:Honestly by Falstius · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

  15. Easily enhanced by johnw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Easily enhanced by i.r.id10t · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  16. Linux is ready for business - Why use Windows? by doodlebumm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  17. Re:Disagree with summary by coolsnowmen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  18. Re:Will it fly? What do you mean win needs 4GB? by davidsyes · · Score: 2, Informative

    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?

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  19. Summary is bad (as usual) by drsmithy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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...

  20. Problem with "Dual-Hibernate" by yet-another-lobbyist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate" by Clarious · · Score: 2, Informative

      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.

    2. Re:Problem with "Dual-Hibernate" by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 2, Informative

      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.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
  21. Re:Honestly by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  22. First done 25 years ago... by bgarcia · · Score: 2, Informative

    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.

    --
    I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
  23. Is This Good For Linux, Or Harmful? by scdeimos · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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? :(