Slashdot Mirror
WinLinux 2000
asdren writes "WinLinux 2000 has entered the final beta stage. This sounds like an interesting option for current Windows users who are interested in taking the Linux plunge but don't have the time/patience/guts to partition drives and configure drivers. " has anyone tried this yet? I'd be curious as to how the installation/running of the system is.
Granted that Wine is still alpha, but even still, winLinux should package Wine, and setup the KDE menu with all windows programs (Unless a kde equivelent exists, and the windows version doesn't work). This way a user goes into linux, and still can run all programs
PS, for a real challange, see if you can parse windows data structures enough that you can take a program running under Windows, start winlinux, and have it show up under Wine when the first user logs into linux! (This is theoritically possibal, but practially a real mess that due to changing fixes/versions of windows probably cannot be done reliabally)
Anyone that has half a brain and has used any "real" Unix OSs knows where Linux stands. Come on people, we've all used it and seen what it can do. It's not a religion and it's not even that good.
Granted, the hype isn't that cool, and it's certainly not worthy of being a religion, but don't sell GNU/Linux short, either. As someone with at least half a brain (as evidenced by the existence of this post) who works daily with the real Unix OSes, I'd have to say that in general the GNU tools are significantly better than their "native" counterparts. Things like chmod -R a+X somedir/ (a+X, not a+x) and cp -Rdp foo/ bar/ come to mind. The main shortcoming has been lack of ACL support, and some features of sort(1) and uniq(1).
With regard to the Linux kernel itself, the only shortcomings I've found there have been some low-level aspects of the SCSI subsystem and lack of proper LVM (although you can still do LVMy things in a pinch). (Most of the rest of my complaints have been addressed in 2.2 and 2.3) Otherwise, in most ways it seems to be superior to the proprietary Unix kernels from a functionality standpoint. I still can't mount Joilet CDs under HP-UX, dammit...
Documentation and many of the third-party tools are a real mixed bag, though. Documentation in most areas is unquestionably worse in Linux, while XFree86 (the S3 server) is considerably more stable and featureful than the X server on the HP-UX 10.20 box sitting on my desk. Most Linux distros also come with loads of very useful little tools that don't ship with most real Unix systems, except the *BSDs.
Berlin-- http://www.berlin-consortium.org
DNA just wants to be free...
It's just the content of the page the article links to. Hopefully it will avoid a sever /. effect on their server.
Considering how few people every actually READ the articles they comment on, I think it's a good idea to have a mirror posted with a Score of 5.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
Mandrake's put a beta version of their Lnx4Win in the 6.1 distribution. This also lets you install Linux without repartitioning, but it doesn't use UMSDOS. Instead, it makes a Linux image file (of a restrictable size) and runs an ext2 filesystem off of it. You boot up with loadlin. Apparently, there's a little bit of a performance hit, but it sounds pretty good.
This Is amusing.
:)
(Score:0, Flamebait)
by infojack on Wednesday September 22, @09:27AM EDT
(User Info)
I Read through all the comments of people who think they are all that and a bag of chips becuase they installed slackware. And then they call this winlinux an emulator, and make up things like it does partition becuase its imposible to install linux on fat. Which proves my point that the distro doesn't tell you how smart the person is. I run redhat and I knew about running linux on a fat partition, and i can read and find out that it reboots the computer, so most likely guys, its not emulating linux. So mabey some of you slackware guys should spend less time flaming and more time learning linux. Or are you too coool for that?
Mirrored this post because I don't have any moderator points and felt I should do a civic good for the day
When I got my PC around 3 years ago I installed then current Slakware using UMSDOS on the Win95 partition. It worked in a fashion, although due to the limitations of the VFAT16 filesystem, each file was hugh, even a device node took up one alloaction unit, and I quickly ran out of space. There were additional problems with UMSDOS and VFAT16 not being totally compatable with each other, and some Win95 files lost their long filenames. I even added an icon to the start menu to boot straight into Linux.
This distribution has been made possible by advancements made with VFAT32 support in UMSDOS.
As a matter of fact I recently installed the VFAT32 version of Windows95, to allow me to run some games, and also to browse a job related website that only works with IE4 (natch!). I will probably stick a UMSDOS filesystem on this drive to allow me to share the disk between the 2 operating systems.
This is not Linux for Windows in the same sense of "Word for Windows." I know that is what a lot of people thought because I thought that too... and that is what a lot of the comments seem to be saying. It has an installer that runs under windows, pulls settings from Windows to make installing Linux easier, and uses UMSDOS to put the linux files on the C: drive.
e.g. c:\linux\usr\bin\netscape etc.
Then when you run linux, an icon set up for you, (probably using loadlin) Windows is shut down and the linux kernel takes over completely starting with text mode and everything.
Your best bet for running Linux at the same time as Windows is VMWARE for windows NT (or vmware for linux, you can run win95/98/NT or almost any other OS under linux).
I think a lot of the resistence you cite is present, but stems from another, perhaps subconscious reason. Humans have always had "rites of passage", whereby people /earn/ their entry into a particular group. In the hacker/geek circle, this "rite of passage" was RTFMing, spending hours in the dark behind a glowing monitor, tweaking code, and intellectually grasping the system so that at the time you are considered "passed", you are in truth already a /part/ of the system. As the bar lowers more and more people can flood in, risking the original group from losing its identity.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Linux is already being affected by hoards of Windows users deciding, hey, I want to run my own fl00d bots and strike ph34r into everyone on IRC.
:)
The problem is, they install Linux, and discover they can't use it. They may be able to use their wonderful point 'n' click winnuke app to kill anyone else using windows's box instantly, but they dont know how anything actually works on their computer, so they install Linux, and think, hey this sucks, then they find the odd cracking tool, and start running around IRC saying they are a l33t hacker cause they use Linux...
All this does is give Linux as bad a name as Windows, regarding the lame users which (both) OSs have (started to, in Linux's case) attract[ed].
I remember when I used Windows9x, and sure, I could do some interesting things on it, but I can remember downloading an eggdrop and asking what are now, to me, embarrasingly lame questions about how I could run an eggdrop 24/7 on a dialup computer (ok, I was an idiot -- im not now, honest) -- at least I knew I needed a shell
I at least, downloaded linux (I can still remember the episode of the Outer Limits that i was watching as slackware downloaded, heh), installed it, and even started mucking around with the source of CircleMUD and now know a decent amouns of C (and I'm learning).
Now, however, you can download a distribution of Linux for Windows... Great.. Now you don't need to be competent at computers to use 'Linux' (I almost destroyed the FAT of one of my drives.. bad mkswap), you point, click, and get thrown into Linux, and have the ability to say 'I know nothing more about computers, but hey, I use Linux'.
IMO, it isn't the OS that is cool, its the fact that using Linux means/ment that you at least had a clue about using computers, and you werent some lame idiot trying to crash boxes, and crack into things you knew nothing about.. Or even if you were, installing Linux meant you had a CLUE, which an increasing number of people using Linux nowadays, no longer have.
They install Red Hat, and then the simplest thing to do with Linux goes wrong, they haven't the faintest idea how to fix it in Linux -- and they dont want to learn. They want someone to give them a magic command, so they can keep living in ignorance..
Ok. I'll stop rambling now.
--
David Taylor
davidt-sd@xfiles.nildram.spam.co.uk
[To e-mail me: s/\.spam//]
They do lock you into KDE, though. If you don't mind being locked into the UI, go for it. As you learn more, you can always get a "real" distribution. I am concerned that the skill for managing your system's boot process won't be learned, but as someone pointed out - so what?
On a personal note, I also find it interesting that the command line interface is viewed as intimidating. I am somewhat intimidated by GUI's. I can't always remember where some setting is hidden, but I can remember a command or the filename to change the setting far more easily.
---
You were a moderator with 5 points. You should have read the moderator guidelines before you did any moderating
First off, very well put. However, I would tend to disagree with you on point number 2. Linux is not an operating system for beginners. It is a full-fledged multi-user server platform and as such needs an administrator. Someone brand new to linux will find out quickly that they don't get those annoying 'permission denied' messages if they always run as root. Plus, they don't want to use a password to use their own computer. They'll use 'password' or 'secret'.
// ithmus
What I'm really trying to get at here is that The more you know about computers, the better you can use one. And using linux as an OS is somewhat pointless unless you know quite a bit about computers. It occurs to me that a person that would put linux on a FAT partition does not care about security, or multi-user capability, and is basically trying linux because its the 'Cool Thing'. If someone wants to try linux, that's great, but for God's sake, read the manual.
return 0;
I'm supposed to be working right now.
Dragonlinux is a nice UMSDOS linux that I found and tried a little under a year ago. Fairly stable, not too sluggish.
It's as bad as partitioning a drive under DOS.
The difference between theory and practice is that, in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
Don't forget that some of us are required to use windows for our jobs. I have an old pentium in my office that is a great Linux server. But my primary PC unfortunately has to run Winbloze. A lot of my co-workers as well as the system admin might be willing to try this if they could just "open a Linux Window" and play with the shell and XFree a little. Then once they've learned the basics I'll finally be able to move some development servers to Linux.
Anything that makes Linux easier to learn is good. Although That's the key, to LEARN it.
hmmmm...what? Oh, I left this stupid
Any heart-attack inducing teasers in the future MUST include non-slashdottable links/mirrors!
-=Best Viewed Using [INLINE]=-
Is this the same thing: http://winlinux.tip.nu/?
-=Best Viewed Using [INLINE]=-
i think that if you are going to install linux, you've got to learn a few things. i sure as hell didn't do my first linux install as a *nix-virgin. i say spend a few weeks, maybe a month or two, on a shell. where you can learn basic commands and basic filesystem/compiling/kernel/lib/etc stuff. sure the install may be easy but when the ./script. which isn't the best plan imho.
bash~#
pops up. are you gonna know what to do with it? sure books are kinda cool but you can't really learn anything unless you get some hands on experiance.
im not saying this is a horrible idea, linux should be installable by anyone, without diffulculty. but it just feels like linux is going point and click, or
tyler
The single biggest obstacle to many of my friends and associates making the switch/taking the plunge is that they need a lifeline. Repartitioning your hard disk and what not does not offer that.
... except as a great 'entry' level, learning tool.
THIS DOES. Sure it's not a 'great' linux system. But it sure looks like an excellent way to dip ones toes in the water and get used to the linux world... While still being able to switch back to MS Windows and load up your office documents...
I don't think this will ever be a 'major' linux distro
/* CDM */
This is NOT the first Linux for Windows. One I have tried that is really good is PhatLinux. I tried it just to see if it worked, then it got deleted off my system (along with Windows). PhatLinux is at www.phatlinux.com and I believe does have an Installshield install, and puts an icon on your desktop to reboot to linux. The only thing that WinLinux2000 is supposed to do that PhatLinux doesn't is load the right drivers automatically. PhatLinux comes with a generic kernel with all modules possible compiled in. Most systems should work OK with it...
Sometimes I get really confused by the postings on here, often from the same people. Now here's where the confusion is: If someone mentions a computer running WinXX then someone else always says "That sux, why don't you run a real operating system?"
Of course, when someone actually creates a product that makes it easy for people to install and begin to use Linux then the tune changes all together. "They're just trying to be 31337 h4x0rs!"
So which is it? Do you want more people running Linux or not? Or will you complain no matter which way it turns out. If everyone moves to Linux then will it just be something to be shuned as being too mainstream? If no one new starts using it will you complain that they don't know what's going on?
Here's my rambling point: Allowing the average Joe User to install and experience Linux easily is a Good Thing(tm). If he likes his experience then he might swtich over all together... it extends choice to those who are not of the technologicaly elite.
So make up your minds. Either help people use see that they have a choice, or convince them to be locked into the MS world. Don't change your tune to make yourself feel better.
MEDIC!
what happened? This linux geek was just sitting here surfing.. and now he's passed out.
What was he reading?
Says here that "Winlinux" is available. Maybe some kind of new Microsoft offering?
--
How about this:
During the install process, detect the registry files residing on a VFAT partition, and open and read it in then?? Why bother starting from the windows end anyways? No "System Information" disks needed.
Slashdot is like Playboy: I read it for the articles
Before the great speculation begins,
heres some info.
whois www.winlinux.net gives
[...]
Registrant
Dinamerico Schwingel (WINLINUX-DOM)
[...]
A search in dejanews for Schwingel AND Dinamerico gives this (Date: 1999/06/25):
In newsgroup installshield.is5.general :
[...]
I'm trying to build my software distributions which is very large. Some thousands files and 219MB total.
The Media Build Wizard goes ok, until it tries to create layout.bin. Then it stucks for about an hour and comes whith this message
[...]
There show up some linux-specific postings (some old) too, so no microsoft, no panic...
[...]
Your computer must have, at least the following configuration to run WinLinux 2000.
a Pentium class processor
16 MB RAM
VGA video card
Windows 95 or Windows 98
an IDE disk drive with approximately 500MB free space on a FAT32 system (Windows 98) or near 1GB free space on a FAT16 system (most Windows 95), for a full setup.
I disagree.
I've ran into a number of folks in the IT industry who express interest in Unix. For the most part, their entire computer experience has been Microsoft products. They don't have access to Unix - but they're interested. My advice? Used hardware that'll handle Linux is dirt cheap. Buy an old Pentium, install Linux, smack it around a bit. Experiment. Learn. If you destroy it, call it a lesson learned. Re-install and repeat.
Experience is indeed the best teacher. Linux (and lets not forget *BSD) offers a low barrier option to that experience.
If you've ever dreamt about choosing the software for your PC, WinLinux 2000 is for you.
If you've ever wanted to have a powerful and reliable system on your computer, WinLinux 2000 is for you.
If you want to enter the Open Source world, WinLinux 2000 is the easiest path.
WinLinux 2000 is the only Linux system that installs as easily as any Windows application automatically detecting and configuring most of your hardware devices.
WinLinux 2000 Beta Release
JRCP is releasing the Final Beta version of WinLinux 2000 for evaluation and testing purposes. We have made every effort to create the easiest to use Linux system in the world and we ask you to give it a try.
Why would you use Linux?
Linux is one of the most powerful systems you can have on your PC. Linux was made for the Internet by the Internet and it is a standard choice of Internet Service Providers around the world. Besides that, Linux is a fully Open Source system that comes with a handful of applications, development tools, games, Internet applications and more. Click for additional features...
Why would you choose WinLinux?
All that power usually demands a complete reconfiguration of the software on your computer and that can be very difficult if you are not experienced with PC hardware and software. WinLinux is a complete Linux system and it is the only one that installs directly to your Windows PC just as any other application. Just point and click to set up.
So, what are you waiting for?
If you think Linux is just for geeks, you are loosing your chance to try it out and start mastering the operating system of the 21st century.
Download now! You will be amazed by its power and reliability and with Netscape Communicator included you will have a fast and stable Internet browsing machine.
If you want more information, please check the other areas of our website using the menu in the upper left of this page. See also our Press Releases
Must say it is not bad for a beta version. You download a single InstallShield executable, run the program, the only information you have to enter is a username. The installation queries the Windows registry for the relevant devices and figures out what Linux drivers should be loaded. It DOES run from a UMSDOS filesystem, so it's not a perfect solution, but for a newbie who would like to try it out without having to repartition their hard drive, it seemed to be pretty user-friendly. Another downside was that it chose the frame-buffer video device instead of the native X driver for my ATI card, but again, WinLinux is a good solution for somebody itching to try Linux, but not wanting to take too much risk.
I think that any product that makes transition from Windows-to-Linux easier on new users is immeasurably useful. At least, until more manufacturers start preloading Linux.
As I write this, I'm sure that a pile of shocked, righteous posts are piling up. Most will assault the very concept of running Linux in conjunction with Windows, others will wax nostalgic about their entry into the world of UNIX while preaching that because it was difficult for me it should be difficult for others, some will be lamenting the fact that it isn't "real" Linux, while still others will pound on the performance issues of using the UMSDOS file system.
The fundamental problem with those attacks is that they all assume that those who will use WinLinux have the same goals, purposes, ideals and reasons for using Linux in the first place.
The first type assumes that by the time a person has decided to use or try Linux, they are already a zealot. That is simply not the case. There are a great many Linux users who secretly hid their Windows usage from other geeks while they climbed the learning curve. The simple fact is that many people's entry into home computing follows the MS path. Once those people have a PC (with Win installed), they may discover Linux and want to try it. One of their primary reasons for wanting to try it? It can be provided free. But, to those people, is a possible disaster ruining an already functioning machine (most people consider their Windows boxes to function) free? Is buying a dedicated box for Linux when they aren't sure they'll like it free? No. Along comes a flavor of Linux which allows you to try it without doing much to your system. Why wouldn't that be good?
Enter attack 2. UNIX/Linux was hard for me, it should be hard for you. I always wonder why I have to hear this one. Particularly from folks who hated it when their parents used this logic on them. Remember, "Walked to school in the snow" or "I worked 3 jobs to finish college"? Science is based on building on the work of others. Sure, you still need to learn how it fits together, but you don't have to recreate all of scientific history. There SHOULD be a way to learn Linux without having to kill one's entire outside life. It may be simplified, it may be limited, but when a beginner hits those walls, sees the potential in someone else's system, then they will move on.
Attack 3. "It isn't real Linux". Because it doesn't reside on its own set of partitions? Because it relies on Windows for driver information? Or because it isn't the same as YOUR Linux? It has a Linux kernel. I think of a parallel in photography. Most people, including most Slashdot readers take the few pictures they do with a point and shoot camera. Hardcore amateur photographers and professionals would say that you aren't going to get good pictures with that type of camera, and some would go so far as to say that unless you are using a high-end medium format or 35mm camera with ultra-fast lenses, you aren't using a real camera. But it has a lens and holds film doesn't it? That makes it a camera. Your point and shoot fits your basic photography needs, and WinLinux fits the basic learning/experimentation Linux needs of many users.
Attack 4. It won't be as high performance as "pure" Linux on SCSI hardware. I guess I always thought one of the benefits of Linux was that it would run on cheap hardware that you already had around. Why doesn't this idea extend to cheap filesystems you already have around?
Sorry to have rambled on and for any lack of clarity in my statements. Flame away.
LetterJ
Writing Geek/Pixel Pusher
jwynia@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~jwynia
The Glass is Too Big: My Take on Things
I downloaded it yesterday, and it works well for what it does.
Unpacks into a UMSDOS directory, c:\linux
Autodetects all of your hardware based on your _windows_ settings. Really nice. I'd like to see more of this in the other distros. Save it to a floppy, and that would solve a lot of questions newbies have (like irq,i/o etc)
If it's wrong (such as missing my video card), you can override the setting. It did really well, finding my printer (hp laserjet), joystick but not sound card (no sound setting?), mouse, modem, timezone.
It asks for a user and password, and even gives you the option to make root the same password.
Gives you a menu option (aka icon) to reboot system into Linux.
I've tried a few of these UMSDOS ones. Armed Linux didn't work with this system, but WinLinux2000 did work. I ended up with a nice (if slow due to UMSDOS) Linux system. Won't replace any of my real linux boxen, but for newbies wanting to try Linux, this is a new option.
Another option is DemoLinux, an entirely CD based Linux. I've had good luck with that one too.
http://www.demolinux.org
Help achieve Liberty in your lifetime - join the Free State Project - http://www.freestateproject.org