OS Questions

[deadly7]

Hey guys--

Been a while since I've done this so I have some questions and am looking for some advice.

My laptop is an HP G60-235DX. I run WinVista on my laptop right now. I hate it. Everything about it.
As such, I want to reformat my computer, but when I do so I have three options I can think of really:
1. Just Linux
2. Just Windows XP
3. WinXP+Linux
[I know everyone thinks Win7 is amazing. I honestly have no need for something that intensive on a laptop that already gets poor battery life just from being 16", so I will avoid that).

I'm leaning toward option 3 because I used to really enjoy using Linux, but haven't been doing so much until I started to get back into Linux at my job. I want to use Slackware, but I don't know much about how it would be compatible with my hardware nor do I know how to check -- it's crucial that it supports at the minimum all of my USB ports and my NIC and integrated Atheros wireless controller, and my Intel video card, and my headphone jack, as I absolutely NEED those for any sort of productivity on my university campus. An additional benefit would be the ability to use my integrated webcam on Linux, as well, but this isn't an undying concern.
WinXP I can figure out just by checking with HP, but I don't know how to check to see if they will support my HDMI port or any of my other software--I"m thinking of the vendor site but if anyone happens to know other resources that would be ncie too. I don't want to end up having installed XP to find nothing works and has no drivers anywhere and be left up shit creek.

Lastly, I need a general storage partition such that I can access it from either WinXP or Slackware so that I can share documents between the two. Are there going to be issues associated with doing this? For example, would Slackware look at a file "John.doc" and format it with different specifications or change its metadata such that "John.doc" is no longer usable on WinXP? What filesystem would I need to make this swap partition? How big should my partitions be in general? I have a 300gb hard drive and have give or take 150gb of movies/music/documents that I would almost need to be able to access from either Slack or XP.

Lastly lasty, would Slack be the Linux choice you recommend? I'm not a bash expert, but I'm not afraid to learn commands as I end up needing them, providing the documentation is adequate. I've also started attempting to edit an fstab for network mounting in Ubuntu for work, so I'm not afraid to try and script for bash either.

Thanks a bunch guys!

[Sidoh]

I don't know about just Linux, especially if your laptop is the only computer you usually have available to you.  I'd probably go with the XP/Linux option, since you don't really lose anything significant, and you kind of get the best of both worlds.

As far as distribution goes, I'd recommend against something like Slackware -- especially for a laptop. I see absolutely no purpose in spending hours fighting to get things working that would just work if you pick a less "minimalistic" distribution like Ubuntu or Fedora.  Personally, I'd recommend Ubuntu.  It's the only distribution I use on my machines (I guess I still have Slackware on my servers, but that's mostly because I don't want to go through the effort of setting them up again), and it works beautifully.

When I used Slackware, Linux was a fun toy.  Something to use when I was bored.  After switching to Ubuntu, it became my primary operating system.  There was no need for Windows.  In fact, when I was in Windows, I felt like I was tied down.  Ubuntu is a much richer environment for most tasks. 

Aside from everything "just working" with Ubuntu (usually right out of the box, all of your hardware, including printers, miscellaneous USB devices, etc.), I'd say the most substantial advantage it has over something like Slackware is it has an officially maintained package system.  If you expect some software to be installed (R, for example), you crack open a terminal and type the appropriate command, instead of just getting "idk wtf you're talking about dude" as a response, if it's software it knows about, it'll say "i know what you're talking about, but i don't have the appropriate software installed.  type this to install it."  It's beautiful.  It's how things should work.

[MyndFyre]

Do Win7+Linux!

[Sidoh]

Do Win7+Linux!

SUCH A TROLL.

[Hitmen]

I have 7/ubuntu on my laptop and it serves me well. 7 is fine but is still pretty annoying if you are used to XP. Ubuntu is awesome, but iago is a jerk and will suggest otherwise.

[deadly7]

I don't know about just Linux, especially if your laptop is the only computer you usually have available to you.  I'd probably go with the XP/Linux option, since you don't really lose anything significant, and you kind of get the best of both worlds.

As far as distribution goes, I'd recommend against something like Slackware -- especially for a laptop. I see absolutely no purpose in spending hours fighting to get things working that would just work if you pick a less "minimalistic" distribution like Ubuntu or Fedora.  Personally, I'd recommend Ubuntu.  It's the only distribution I use on my machines (I guess I still have Slackware on my servers, but that's mostly because I don't want to go through the effort of setting them up again), and it works beautifully.

When I used Slackware, Linux was a fun toy.  Something to use when I was bored.  After switching to Ubuntu, it became my primary operating system.  There was no need for Windows.  In fact, when I was in Windows, I felt like I was tied down.  Ubuntu is a much richer environment for most tasks. 

Aside from everything "just working" with Ubuntu (usually right out of the box, all of your hardware, including printers, miscellaneous USB devices, etc.), I'd say the most substantial advantage it has over something like Slackware is it has an officially maintained package system.  If you expect some software to be installed (R, for example), you crack open a terminal and type the appropriate command, instead of just getting "idk wtf you're talking about dude" as a response, if it's software it knows about, it'll say "i know what you're talking about, but i don't have the appropriate software installed.  type this to install it."  It's beautiful.  It's how things should work.

I know Slackware has a slapt-get program, but it isn't as supported or widely used as apt-get is. Can you explain to me the advantages of each type then? In my dealings with Ubuntu, I've seen nothing that has made go "this is the absolute best Linux OS for me"... I haven't noticed too much of a difference between Ubuntu/Slackware, but I haven't tried to do high-level things in Ubuntu yet. Also, does Ubuntu have the same filesystems as Slack? Does it have a default package list you can pick and choose from while installing? How about WM support--XFCE is by far my favorite and I have no desire to switch.

[Newby]

Before you ask questions about various Linux distros, know this: with a bit of work, Linux is exactly what you want. Don't like Ubuntu's default filesystem? Format it yourself. Don't like Gnome? Install XFCE. Hell, they have one with XFCE: Xubuntu.

Either way, Ubuntu has an incredible user base that actively maintains the package list, so that things are generally up-to-date.

Low-level wise, they're practically the same. It's Linux. High-level wise, Ubuntu pretty much destroys Slackware. But Slackware wasn't meant to be super user friendly. =P

If you really want to give Linux a try on a laptop, odds are Ubuntu has enough put together to make your laptop experience incredible. As incredible as an experience with a mediocre OS could be, anyway. =P

[Sidoh]

I know Slackware has a slapt-get program, but it isn't as supported or widely used as apt-get is. Can you explain to me the advantages of each type then? In my dealings with Ubuntu, I've seen nothing that has made go "this is the absolute best Linux OS for me"... I haven't noticed too much of a difference between Ubuntu/Slackware, but I haven't tried to do high-level things in Ubuntu yet. Also, does Ubuntu have the same filesystems as Slack? Does it have a default package list you can pick and choose from while installing? How about WM support--XFCE is by far my favorite and I have no desire to switch.

It isn't nearly as well maintained as Ubuntu's repositories, and the program isn't nearly as well-behaved as apt.  Also, Ubuntu has synpatic (GUI for apt), which is amazing.

That's probably because you haven't done much with Linux.  If you use Slackware for long, you'll run into things that are problematic, and you'll have to spend an unreasonable amount of time troubleshooting and digging through the Internet to find a solution.  With Ubuntu, just about everything works.

Why do you like XFCE?  Under most circumstances, minimalistic pisses me off. :P

Yes, you can use arbitrary WMs with Ubuntu, and yes, you can use whatever filesystem you want.

Distributions like Slackware and Gentoo have lots of fanboys, but most of the fanboism is unjustified, in my opinion.

[Camel]

I don't care who you ask, Linux lappys are sexy.

Put Windows in a VM; you can get VirtualBox for free.

[deadly7]

It isn't nearly as well maintained as Ubuntu's repositories, and the program isn't nearly as well-behaved as apt.  Also, Ubuntu has synpatic (GUI for apt), which is amazing.

slapt-get worked fine for me from what I remember using about it. But then, I compiled most of my own programs from source. And I will admit, it got to be a bit tedious after a while.

That's probably because you haven't done much with Linux.  If you use Slackware for long, you'll run into things that are problematic, and you'll have to spend an unreasonable amount of time troubleshooting and digging through the Internet to find a solution.  With Ubuntu, just about everything works.

I'm not a super-user, I'll admit. But I didn't just turn it on and go "duhhh it dah linux it purty". :P Most of my Slack problems were easily resolved by reinstalling (in the case when I rm -rf /* my computer.. oops) or by learning a new command iago told me about.

Why do you like XFCE?  Under most circumstances, minimalistic pisses me off. :P

Yes, you can use arbitrary WMs with Ubuntu, and yes, you can use whatever filesystem you want.

XFCE is what I want from a WM in most situations that I remember using it. It's extremely lightweight, doesn't have all the extra flash that bugs me a lot about Vista, 7, Macs, and KDE. It's got lots of workspace environments. I've found it easy ot use. Which WM do you use and why?

Distributions like Slackware and Gentoo have lots of fanboys, but most of the fanboism is unjustified, in my opinion.

Fanboyism is usually devoid of reason by the ignorant masses. That said, I'd trust Newby and iago's [and yours, obviously] opinions. :P

Any idea how what I would do if I have files I'd want both Windows and Linux to read, write, and otherwise interact with without destroying theem for the other OS? In the other thread I asked this you said to use the WIndows partition and do that, I just want to see if other people's feelings echo that thought or not.

[Sidoh]

slapt-get worked fine for me from what I remember using about it. But then, I compiled most of my own programs from source. And I will admit, it got to be a bit tedious after a while.

Ubuntu's repositories are impressively expansive.  Whoever manages slapt-get could not possibly compare.  :)

I'm not a super-user, I'll admit. But I didn't just turn it on and go "duhhh it dah linux it purty". :P Most of my Slack problems were easily resolved by reinstalling (in the case when I rm -rf /* my computer.. oops) or by learning a new command iago told me about.

I'm talking about stuff like tinkering with settings files, etc.  It's not fun, and it should never be necessary.

XFCE is what I want from a WM in most situations that I remember using it. It's extremely lightweight, doesn't have all the extra flash that bugs me a lot about Vista, 7, Macs, and KDE. It's got lots of workspace environments. I've found it easy ot use. Which WM do you use and why?

I use Gnome.  It's not like it's bulky in any meaningful sense of the word, and it has more capability than WMs like XFCE.  Not to say I would mind using XFCE, though. :)

Fanboyism is usually devoid of reason by the ignorant masses. That said, I'd trust Newby and iago's [and yours, obviously] opinions. :P

Any idea how what I would do if I have files I'd want both Windows and Linux to read, write, and otherwise interact with without destroying theem for the other OS? In the other thread I asked this you said to use the WIndows partition and do that, I just want to see if other people's feelings echo that thought or not.

You can have a shared NTFS data partition.  If you want to keep your data separate from the OS, that's probably the best idea.  Otherwise, Linux can get to the Windows partition.  If you have a reasonably large HD, having a separate data partition (NTFS) is probably a great idea.

[MyndFyre]

Do Win7+Linux!

SUCH A TROLL.

O HAI

[mynameistmp]

If you are torn between Slackware and Ubuntu, my recommendation is Debian. In fact, if you want to run Linux at all, my recommendation is Debian.

[deadly7]

If you are torn between Slackware and Ubuntu, my recommendation is Debian. In fact, if you want to run Linux at all, my recommendation is Debian.

Never used it. Pros/cons to someone that [right now] doesn't have time to learn how to manipulate Linux to do whatever he wants it to?

[Sidoh]

I've tried Debian before.  I didn't work as smoothly as Ubuntu right away, and since I didn't have any reason to try it other than curiosity, I gave up on it rather quickly.  I'm sure it's just as nice in most ways, though. :)