Nothing to do with POIs here. Since winter is coming I was looking for an indoor project to keep me busy (when not shoveling snow). I thought I would experiment with learning Linux. From a little searching yesterday it looks like Fedora or Ubuntu are popular versions. I will be installing it on a home desktop computer as a dual boot and I'm not worried about any server applications.
I know that some users here use Linux and would like to hear your thoughts and suggestions on which to install.
I'm certain there are endless Linux user groups available on the web that would tap into a much larger talent pool on the subject than you could find here.
Not saying that there aren't talented Linux users here, just that the focus of this group is POI and there are groups where the focus is Linux.
I recently downloaded Ubuntu 12 Desktop and installed it as a VMware virtual machine, and I have to say that I was quite impressed. My previous Linux experience was with Ubuntu 7 and the GUI was okay but it still felt kind of klunky. Apparently the GUI is all-new in Ubuntu 12, and I find it very slick.
Linux Mint is a distribution based on Ubuntu that also seems to be quite popular. Investigating it will be one of my winter projects.
I have no experience with Fedora, although many years ago I worked with RedHat releases and was quite satisfied with them at the time. I'll be interested to hear what others think.
That is true, but one of the advantages of asking such a question in a forum where Linux is not the main focus is that we might see some balanced answers from people who aren't zealous defenders of their particular flavour of Linux.
I would also suggest giving Ubuntu a spin.
I have been using Redhat since RH7 (1990's) and then moved to Fedora when it branched off of RH. I prefer the KDE desktop to Gnome. The last 2 release of Fedora are very slick and polished.
If it wasn't for a couple of Winders apps that just dont run well in linux (wine) I would be on Fedora 100% of the time.
From my very limited experience with Ubuntu I don't think you would be wrong choosing either one.
It depends what you are trying to achieve. Fedora is a free enterprise version of the Linux, while Ubuntu is desktop version with strong emphasis on GUI. If you new for Linux try Ubuntu first. The power of Linux is really coming from command line and this might be boring for you if you brought up on Windows culture. Ubuntu is closer to Windows and this might be easier and familiar for you.
Thanks to all for the advice. I went with Ubuntu and did a dual boot with the Windows 8 on the desktop. I do wish that Windows 8 was the default selection on startup so I didn't have to listen to my daughter complain about an extra step when turning it on. I'll probably learn how to re-order the bootup selections later or change the default selection.
My interest is just to learn why so many of you are using Linux and eventually be able to handle my FW, map and POI updates using Linux on my 4 GPSs. One day, in the future, when I am familiar enough I'll start playing with the command line.
I don't do much on the internet other than email, a little surfing, this site and Garmin's site. During nice weather I try to ride when not working. So like I said, a winter project when stuck inside.
There is a free program from Oracle called VirtualBox. With this from withing Windows (or Mac) you can run other operating systems as virtual pc's.
On my Windows 7 machine I can run virtual PC's running Windows XP SP2, XP SP3, Server 2008, and Windows 8. I even experimented running Hackintosh (Mac OS running under windows)
This way you don't have to decide on boot, and just run the Linux when you want.
Just my 2 cents.
This program sounds really cool. I guess I need to uninstall the whole thing and start over. Glad I have all winter to learn my way.
I'm in Ubuntu using Firefox posting now. Things in the GUI are working pretty well though Ibuntu does take twice as long as Win 8 to bootup. Next thing you know I'll be running POILoader.
I too decided to go the Linux way a few years back. I even managed to get my father (aged 82) to buy his first PC a couple years back, and we tossed Ubuntu on it.
He had no worries with it at all, despite the fact that he's as computer-illiterate as you may get them.
He was delighted to discover that he was always using the most up-to-date version of his programs, be they browsers, music / media players, text editor - all of those are automatically upgraded, and at no additional cost. Heck, at no cost at all!
With Ubuntu however, we were faced with the change of UI, as well as the complications of some menus / actions. In other words, I truly can't see him on the Unity Desktop.
But what is great with Linux, is that you may somehow "stop the time", and no longer proceed with updates if you so wish. Just run the security updates to keep your applications up to date, but don't change your OS' version.
That's what happens for example with Linux Mint: you do NOT get an upgrade of the core system by default. And you therefore keep the environment you've grown used to accessing.
Some things are so nice with Linux, like the multiple yet simple ways to add an application. Just launch the Ubuntu Application Center, take your pick, review the comments made by previous users, and simply click on Install. And you will find your new shortcut duly added in one of the few, system-defined a,d logical groups that are part of your system: Accessories, Others, Office, Education, Graphics, Internet, Games, System Tools, Programming, Sciences, Sound and Video. No need to search through all those groups or subgroups that we so frequently encounter in the Windows world.
There are of course additional Desktops available on the market. I recently decided to give a test drive to an extremely light one, called Lubuntu. And I'm now convinced that, were I faced with a new configuration choice for a newbie, then it'd quite probably be my pick of the moment.
One last point: if you wish to learn those without breaking your computer, then I do recommend using Virtual Machines as well. You'll then decide if you want to take the plunge
My wife may disagree, but I'm man enough to admit when i'm wrong.
Looks like some very good feedback was provided in this forum.
For quite awhile now I have been dual booting with windows and Ubuntu. The new edition of Mint, Linux Mint 13 Cinnamon is so good I have changed over to it rather than using Ubuntu. Mint is essentially Ubuntu but in a nicer format.
To dual boot with windows coming up first, I found this on the internet and it works perfectly. You can even change the amount of seconds that it pauses rather to boot windows or Linux. It refers to older stuff, but works just fine with the new editions of grub.
e: selecting boot order in 9.1
If you have a new install of Karmic you now have grub2 and no menu.lst to edit.
If you refer to Windows by its number, you will have to edit on every update. But Grub 2 also lets you use the title. Suppose your Windows title is "Windows Vista (on /dev/sda1)". Then you can use in /etc/grub/default, and you won't have to edit Grub after kernel updates.
find your windows entry in this and copy to grub default like this Vista entry:
and copy into grub_default line here:
gksudo gedit /etc/default/grub
change to comment # or delete old and add new line:
GRUB_DEFAULT="Windows Vista (on /dev/sda1)"
I had a dual boot Win XP and Ubuntu for many years, booting mainly into XP. Then my XP took a nosedive about 2 years ago and I just couldn't resurrect it without wiping everything.. so I said the heck with it, added another hard drive with Ubuntu 9 something as the primary, and never looked back. I froze at Ubuntu 11.04 without the miserable (IMO) unity interface. (That's an option btw., pick "Classic" on the login screen)
I kept my original Win XP boot as a partition but use Oracle VM VirtualBox with a new XP installation for things (like the Garmin junk) that just want Windoze and nothing else, and to run some native Windoze progs that I need for my years of legacy files on the old partition.
With the exception of possibly a tablet running a version, I'll never use Windoze again. I love Ubuntu & the learning curve wasn't hard, install was super-easy. I hear Mint is nice .. I'm tempted to try it in a VM or dual boot just to see.
With the exception of possibly a tablet running a version, I'll never use Windoze again.
Thanks for your input. Just FYI, using childish terms like "Windoze" does not help your credibility when commenting on such matters.
Perhaps for you.
I've used Windoze since it came out, and looking back dozing is a highly appropriate description for my PC experiences between D0S 5 and Ubuntu.
I do wish I had known about VirtualBox before starting. The next time I wipe the desktop and start from scratch I'll most likely go this route. I might try VirtualBox on the laptop.
I have Wine loaded and working and I have loaded MapSource. Next thing is to get MapSource to recognize the maps and my different GPSs when connected.
For now it looks like I'll be jumping into the Command line box a little sooner than expected when I try to change the desktop's boot order from Dudlee's suggestion above. I did open the Command Line box yesterday and typed "help". What can I say - WOW!
Last but not least, if an 82 year old guy can figure out Ubuntu I hope I can. You really put the pressure on me now!
Another option for virtualization would be VMware Player. I've used VMware products (Server, Workstation, and Player) for years and I'm a huge fan. Player is free for noncommercial use.
I successfully changed the boot order so Windows 8 is the default. Now I don't have to listen to my daughter's complaining anymore.
Well, I've played around with Linux and I found that Mint Linux (Ubuntu-based) is a pretty good starting point.
Why I say this:
- It works on most systems (that aren't bleeding edge new -- I had issues with a video card), I've personally put it on an i5, all the way down to a 486
- Unlike some other flavours of Linux, it's up and usable from the install.
Like most Linux Flavours, it can also be installed on a USB stick -- in fact, I use one to help me fix/virus check PCs for people when their windows PCs are totally FUBAR.
I use this app to put Distros on USB sticks:
( http://www.linuxliveusb.com/en/home )
I find that testing various Linux flavour is easiest off a USB stick, instead of doing the whole dual-boot thing, which can often cause even worse issues on Windows PCs -- and I hear that trying to use Win8 with dual-boot is a nightmare.
Other benefit, once you pull out the USB, there is no trace of Linux left on the PC
Hope that helps you some.
I've been using Ubuntu for about 5 years now. My only regret is not trying it earlier. Its really getting more and more user friendly. There's open source equivalents to most software available. LibreOffice, and Gimp are two examples.
Virtual machine fans should be aware that this additional layer consumes approximately 20% of the hardware resources.
Modern computers are powerful ones and this still could be OK but choice should be done with knowledge of price it comes with.
Virtual machine fans should be aware that this additional layer consumes approximately 20% of the hardware resources.
...the benefits of virtualization can be tremendous, with costs that are usually not as bad as your statement suggests.
For example, I have Windows 8 running on my older notebook (Dell Inspiron, 3-4 years old). Here's what happened when I fired up the Ubuntu_12 virtual machine I'm using to post this reply.
At the Windows 8 desktop: 770 MB in use / 2.6 GB available
After launching VMware Player: 816 MB in use / 2.6 GB available
VM running, at Ubuntu desktop: 1.5 GB in use / 1.9 GB available
The virtual machine has 1 GB of (virtual) RAM, and VMware Player *plus* the Ubuntu VM are only using just over 700 MB in total.
Now for completeness, when VMware Player is installed it creates a few services that load when Windows starts up, so the 770 MB in use before launching the VMware Player application included:
1.7 MB - VMware Authorization Service
0.6 MB - VMware NAT Service
0.9 MB - VMware USB Arbitration Service
0.6 MB - VMware VMnet DHCP Service
Of the 3.5 GB available RAM on this machine, that represents 0.1% "permanent" overhead (i.e., when VMware player is not running).
As for benefits, here are just a few (for VMware Player, at least):
- you have access to both OSs at the same time (obviously)
- you can create shared folders in the Host filesystem and access them as network shares on the Guest.
- you can use Bridged networking (Guest has its own IP address in the same address space as the Host), or the Guest can be behind a NAT (handy if you are at a hotel where the Internet connection is locked to a specific MAC address)
- as illustrated above, the Guest only uses real resources on the host if it needs them. It can have, say, a 60 GB virtual disk, but it (normally) only consumes as much physical disk space as it needs (compare with a dual-boot setup using separate partitions)
- you can make a copy of the folder containing the virtual machine files to create a "snapshot", which you can go back to later (VMware Workstation has a more sophisticated way of dealing with snapshots)
Okay, I'll stop now. You'll have to forgive me, but I fell for VMware after downloading the 30-day trial of Workstation 3.0 about 10 or 11 years ago and I have never looked back.
Computer resources aren't about memory only. The extra layer also consumes CPU cycles and I/O. The 20% overhead are noticeable on busy systems. I don't think it would be matter much for home, mostly idled machines. If somebody frequently doing image processing, playing games that requires a lots of resources this would be noticeable.
Computer virtualization gives you a lot of flexibility but it takes something too like higher resource consumption and more complexity on your system. That I wanted to say. I'm not against that technology, just one should be aware of price it comes with.
I can't deny that virtualization has some performance and resource implications. However, I still think that your blanket "20%" is far too broad and much too pessimistic, especially for someone using a VM to take a new OS for a test drive.
My work notebook runs Windows 7 and has VMware Workstation installed. It has a Windows 7 virtual machine (what VMware calls a "Guest") on it. When I generate Windows' performance indexes on each of them I get the following scores:
6.9 6.9 Processor
7.3 7.4 Memory (RAM)
6.5 5.9 Graphics
6.5 5.6 Gaming graphics
5.9 5.9 Hard disk
Yes, the graphics scores take a hit, but the overall performance is certainly comparable. For long-term use someone might consider repartitioning the drive and setting up a dual-boot system, especially if they expect to do some of the really resource-intensive activities you mentioned, but I would not be at all surprised if the majority of people didn't find that necessary.
Spending my spare time testing my 1490 around town checking for dependabliity. So far it's very trustworthy
Over the weekend my curiosity got the best of me so I downloaded and installed Linux Mints. Note the plural. That's why I decided to post this message.
When you get to the Linux Mint download page you have to make some choices:
- 32-bit or 64-bit -- expected
- with or without multimedia (software patent issues) -- fair enough
- "MATE" or "Cinnamon" desktop -- umm, I don't know....
The super-short version is that once upon a time the "default" desktop environment (DE) in Ubuntu was something called Gnome, and when the Gnome developers changed things in Gnome3 there was a lot of resistance to the changes (probably similar to many of the reactionary complaints about Windows 8). That led to a bit of a revolt, and Linux Mint now offers two alternate DEs: MATE (based on Gnome2) and Cinnamon (based on Gnome3 code but styled more like Gnome2).
Which one do I want? I dunno -- flip a coin. I tried them both and I'm sure that either one would be quite usable. They both seem to have lots of fans.
But it doesn't stop there. Like I've said before, if one were to hit forums.linuxmint.com and ask "Which should I pick: MATE or Cinnamon?" a rather large percentage of the responses would advocate some other desktop environment. In fact, they have a poll about which DE people use and there are 10 choices (the maximum number of choices offered by the forum software):
Fluxbox, OpenBox, Blackbox, *box
Other (e.g., Enlightenment, Trinity, RazorQT, ROX)
That, in my opinion, is something that will always tend to hold Linux back: Even when talking about "one" Linux distribution (Mint) there are often just too many choices.
For now I'm just going to stick with Ubuntu_12. I honestly don't understand why some people dislike the Unity DE so much; I think it's quite slick.
Brilliant link, VGuy. Thanks. TED is a great site/concept, imo.
The talk explains the timelessness of sayings like 'Everything in moderation'. But I have to say that I like being able to craft a solution that fits my needs (lots of choices to pick from), albeit needing to keep my overindulgence in check (so as not to be disappointed).
You're sort of right that there are too many Linux DE's for any given distro, but I think that the bigger issue is most of the Linux-familiar people seem to be more 'hands-on' than those who are unfamiliar .. so there aren't really enough viewpoints from outside of the Linux mainstream. Think about it .. Ubuntu is popular because it's limited in set-up choices, and need for 'under the hood' tweaks. Anyway ..
I stuck at Ubuntu 11.04 with the Classic DE because my NVidia graphics card wouldn't play well with Unity, and I'd rather just stick with what was familiar and worked for me.
But, I got the impression that Gnome3 was a major re-do that allowed expansion into things like the Unity DE, but didn't necessarily mean that it had to use it .. was I correct? Is Cinnamon like Ubuntu Unity, or not really? I've dl'ed both Mate and Cinnamon to try, but haven't tried them just yet. I'm also curious why you decided to stick with your Ubuntu installation rather than Mint. Same as me (not really broken, no fix needed), or didn't care for either?
That was the first TED talk I watched (a friend sent me the link) and it's still one of my favourites.
I agree with your comment about many of the decisions regarding Linux being taken by people who are long-time tweakers and technophiles who can more easily lose sight of what a "regular user" might want. (I hope I've interpreted it correctly.) Two other things have, IMO, contributed to what we could call the "multi-Mints" phenomenon:
- Linux on the desktop has historically been adopted mainly by hobbyists who *like* having several dozen desktop options to tinker with. In that way it is much more interesting than a boring old Windows or Mac computer.
- It's just too easy (for people who have the skills and the time) to splinter off another distribution or desktop environment. Don't like something about Linux flavour 'x'? No problem, just go ahead and roll your own.
As for Gnome2 vs Gnome3, I gather that Gnome3's underlying code is quite different than Gnome2's and that there are (and will be more) "cool things" that Gnome3 can do and Gnome2 cannot (sorry, no specifics - I'm really no expert). However, Cinnamon is much closer to MATE than it is to Unity in terms of overall "look and feel".
Why am I sticking with Ubuntu_12 (at least for now)? Ironically, one big reason is that Unity feels much *less" familiar to me than either Cinnamon or MATE so I'm forcing myself to give Unity an honest try (much like I've been doing with Windows 8). I'm also intrigued by Unity's HUD integration with applications like GIMP. (I've just started experimenting with GIMP and it is a bit daunting but I am absolutely blown away by what GIMP can do.)
I have been using Linux for about 15 years, and the last 10 years as my primary system. Only in the last couple of weeks have I even tried to see if my laptop would still boot to Windows, and it does. Needed to do that to install the Rand-McNally Dock. I see there are other posts here, maybe I will learn I don't need Windows for that either.
I was a KDE fan for years, then switched to Gnome when KDE reinvented itself. Then when Gnome did that in the last year or two, I changed to Mint. I like to have my desktop look rather old-fashioned, with icons for what I need at the bottom. My desktop would look rather familiar to a Windows Vista user, except that I have it set up for 6 'desktops', and have the switcher at bottom center to easily move from one to the next.
I don't think it has been mentioned here; you can get a rough idea of the popularity of the various systems by going to www.distrowatch.com.
Well one thing I am sure of, I most certainly did not know what I was getting myself into when I started this post.
I do have Ubuntu 12.04 LTE(?) installed on my laptop at home because of the compatibility issues with the wireless card installed in the laptop. I did crash the desktop completely and had to re-image the hard drive to the pre-Linux configuration. It wasn't the software's problem though, it was me doing what I shouldn't do. It wasn't to big a deal though. I'll probably try Mint/Cinnamin on the desktop when I have the time.
There is quite a bit more to Linux than just installing and learning it. It is a different world out there!
All the advice here is great, thanks.
What software is available on Linux for managing POIs, waypoints, routes, etc.?
See the related thread here:
terms | privacy | contactCopyright © 2006-2019