Searching \ for '[EE] Linux-Windows mashup' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=linux+windows+mashup
Search entire site for: 'Linux-Windows mashup'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] Linux-Windows mashup'
2008\07\10@142257 by Dr Skip

picon face
OK, I know it seems like it's been talked about before, but the landscape keeps
changing and new guys are in and out. SO, for someone who needs windows, but
wants to seriously use Linux at the same time, with MINIMAL installation issues
(no new partitions for instance, no grub), NORMAL speed (not run from CD,
although a jump drive version (under windows, no reboot) might be cool), and
MAXIMAL reliability (if you're gonna use it, you're gonna count on it), which
would one choose or recommend? Some of these might even be useful for the list...

http://www.ulteo.com/home/en/virtualdesktop?autolang=en

http://wubi-installer.org/

http://www.andlinux.org/index.php

I've found QEMU would crash or disappear randomly in use, so wasn't the best in
terms of reliability, and VMware player was like trying to run in a course of
tires - it always seemed like I was having to work around something it had a
problem with networking or file sharing wise. You were also limited to other
people's setups. Their server is just a big heavy pig (IMHO).

So, anything useful here? I not only would like to run something myself, but I
know a lot of folks who do too, but the little crashes and incompatibilities
are too much for these guys. It's all work, no hacking for them, and the biz
has them tied to windows (one would hope until they migrate themselves and show
it can be done)... ;)

Thanks,
Skip

2008\07\10@145410 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
I am using VmWare at my primary job, but it is not free - not the player or
server but the workstation...

But at home couple of weeks ago started to try out different
virtualisations, like other VmWare products than Workstation, QUEMU with
KVM, Wine - did not try out Xen as I have no VM capable of CPU. Finally I
come across with VirtualBox, which has a free and open source edition. I
have to say after years of working with VmWare workstation I was really
surprised that another one can compete it. It is now maintained by Sun, and
as you guess Sun has a great experience on virtual machines (Java VM). It is
faster, and smoother, and has a very nice and interesting feature: It can
integrate the Windows desktop running in the VM into my Gnome desktop, so
actually a Win executable looks like a native linux application except the
look-a-like of the window frame of course - it runs on the virtual machine
on a geniue Windows however...

Now I have two monitors attached to the laptop, the internal and an external
LCD screen. Usually on the external I keep the Gnome desktop while on the
internal the VirtualBox+Windows in full screen so just move over the mouse
and the switch between the two OS is done, that is that easy. Of course
neither OS stops when out of focus, and VirtualBox does not eat my CPU
either.

The only thing was that the OSE (open source edition) does not support USB
which is a disadvantage if you use PicKit2 for example or working on a USB
project. There is an evaluation version which is not OSE but you can try and
I believe it is free for personal usage. Not sure about the fee of the
licence, but I guess it could be cheaper than VmWare Workstation.

Oh, and it supports snapshots (not that sophisticated ad in VmWare but it is
still very useful), supports suspension, also pause function that is
non-existent on VmWare, shared folders, different virtual network settings
and many more.

http://www.virtualbox.org/

With Ubuntu you just have to open the package manager and search for the
name, install and try :-)

Tamas



On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 7:21 PM, Dr Skip <spam_OUTdrskipTakeThisOuTspamgmail.com> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2008\07\10@170737 by Dave Tweed

face
flavicon
face
Dr Skip wrote:
> OK, I know it seems like it's been talked about before, but the landscape
> keeps changing and new guys are in and out. SO, for someone who needs
> windows, but wants to seriously use Linux at the same time, with MINIMAL
> installation issues (no new partitions for instance, no grub), NORMAL
> speed (not run from CD, although a jump drive version (under windows, no
> reboot) might be cool), and MAXIMAL reliability (if you're gonna use it,
> you're gonna count on it), which would one choose or recommend? Some of
> these might even be useful for the list...
>
> www.ulteo.com/home/en/virtualdesktop?autolang=en
>
> http://wubi-installer.org/
>
> http://www.andlinux.org/index.php

You might want to add coLinux to this list. I've not used it myself, but
I've heard good things about it, including having fewer integration issues
than, say, Cygwin.

  http://www.colinux.org/

Ah, I just looked at andLinux, and it's based on coLinux. So is ulteo
virtual desktop.

I use Cygwin almost all the time, but then I'm not doing anything fancy.
But with that, you're not running Linux, you're just running Linux software
recompiled for Windows (on top of the Cygwin adaptation library).

  http://www.cygwin.com/

-- Dave Tweed

2008\07\10@180318 by Dr Skip

picon face
Good suggestions, I thought there were more... I'm really looking for something
that gives great integration between apps, is stable, and will let me use kde
apps in windows without feeling like I'm running 2 different PCs. I could also
get quite a few colleagues to get into kde apps that way and start the
migration process. ;)

I'm hoping someone here has used these and can comment too.


Dave Tweed wrote:

{Quote hidden}

2008\07\10@183154 by cdb

flavicon
face
I've been trying to get coLinux to work, with only limited success.

Colin

:: OK, I know it seems like it's been talked about before, but the
:: landscape keeps
:: changing and new guys are in and out. SO, for someone who needs
:: windows, but
:: wants to seriously use Linux at the same time, with MINIMAL
:: installation issues
:: (no new partitions for instance, no grub), NORMAL speed (not run
:: from CD,
:: although a jump drive version (under windows, no reboot) might be
:: cool), and
:: MAXIMAL reliability (if you're gonna use it, you're gonna count on
:: it), which
:: would one choose or recommend? Some of these might even be useful
:: for the list...
::
:: www.ulteo.com/home/en/virtualdesktop?autolang=en
::
:: http://wubi-installer.org/
::
:: http://www.andlinux.org/index.php
::
:: I've found QEMU would crash or disappear randomly in use, so
:: wasn't the best in
:: terms of reliability, and VMware player was like trying to run in
:: a course of
:: tires - it always seemed like I was having to work around
:: something it had a
:: problem with networking or file sharing wise. You were also
:: limited to other
:: people's setups. Their server is just a big heavy pig (IMHO).
::
:: So, anything useful here? I not only would like to run something
:: myself, but I
:: know a lot of folks who do too, but the little crashes and
:: incompatibilities
:: are too much for these guys. It's all work, no hacking for them,
:: and the biz
:: has them tied to windows (one would hope until they migrate
:: themselves and show
:: it can be done)... ;)
::
:: Thanks,
:: Skip
--
cdb, .....colinKILLspamspam@spam@btech-online.co.uk on 11/07/2008

Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk  

Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359

Friendship multiplies the good of life and divides the evil.
Baltasar Gracian





2008\07\10@210027 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 5:07 AM, Dave Tweed <picspamKILLspamdtweed.com> wrote:

> You might want to add coLinux to this list. I've not used it myself, but
> I've heard good things about it, including having fewer integration issues
> than, say, Cygwin.
>
>   http://www.colinux.org/
>

I tried using Cygwin but CygwinX is not working too well. Then I tried CoLinux
and it is not working well either.

Now I use Windows/Linux dual boot (actually multiboot with 2xFedora,
2xUbuntu, Windows XP, FreeBSD and NetBSD).


Xiaofan

2008\07\10@210159 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 6:02 AM, Dr Skip <.....drskipKILLspamspam.....gmail.com> wrote:
> Good suggestions, I thought there were more... I'm really looking for something
> that gives great integration between apps, is stable, and will let me use kde
> apps in windows without feeling like I'm running 2 different PCs. I could also
> get quite a few colleagues to get into kde apps that way and start the
> migration process. ;)
>

Wait a bit for KDE 4 for Windows to be stable. I could not get it installed
properly a few months ago.

Xiaofan

2008\07\10@210446 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Xiaofan Chen <EraseMExiaofancspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTgmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 6:02 AM, Dr Skip <drskipspamspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote:
>> Good suggestions, I thought there were more... I'm really looking for something
>> that gives great integration between apps, is stable, and will let me use kde
>> apps in windows without feeling like I'm running 2 different PCs. I could also
>> get quite a few colleagues to get into kde apps that way and start the
>> migration process. ;)
>>
>
> Wait a bit for KDE 4 for Windows to be stable. I could not get it installed
> properly a few months ago.
>

Another thing, to use Linux as a VM under Windows and you will
not be a good user of Linux any time. The best is to run Linux
and try to use it.

By the way, what is your expectation from Linux? I guess you
have a wrong expectation. Linux is not Windows.

Xiaofan

2008\07\10@220820 by Dr Skip

picon face
I've used UNIX, then later, Linux since '79 or '80, so I don't think I have the
wrong expectation... I personally would like to use several KDE apps under
windows right now. KDE for Win isn't ready. There are some other neat UNIX only
things I'd probably use too, although I could get Cygwin to do it now, just no X.

More usefully, the others have business PCs that can't be diddled with too
much. For home, they complain that it would be too much of a learning curve to
run Linux at home. If I could set up something that was Linux, but low key,
they would use K-this and K-that along with the daily grind and after a while
be comfortable. Their business sponsored laptops wouldn't become a support
issue for the company either. Then they run Linux at home since there is little
learning curve at that point. Then they become missionaries... ;)

These aren't engineers. They are not illiterate though, and can learn, but the
systems they have cobbled together help them to be very productive as is. There
is no compelling business reason to try something new, so the barriers to using
this have to be small. Once the FUD factors are removed, future decisions on
what to run will be made more rationally. First, concerns over stability,
compatibility, reliability, user interface, etc, must be overcome in daily use
without disturbing the stuff that brings in the money...

The path to widespread Linux adoption is going to have to be evolution, not
revolution, for the masses. Vista, and fear of Vista have created an
opportunity for Linux supporters, but like any product, it has to have the best
perceived cost-benefit, and it has to have salesmen... By changing their
attitudes through daily accomodation, they become future 'salesmen' for the
idea. There are a zillion (big number) little trip-ups in adopting any new
system, and most aren't difficult. Look at all the little 'fixes' and changes
everyone does to windows to keep it running. They are comfortable fixing their
problems, to a point. It will take gradual usage to get there for them. Windows
came from DOS, and they all said "I can handle DOS, I'll handle windows". Unix
came from larger systems, so it's also perceived to be tougher to manage and an
unknown for most.


Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Xiaofan Chen <@spam@xiaofancKILLspamspamgmail.com> wrote:
>
> Another thing, to use Linux as a VM under Windows and you will
> not be a good user of Linux any time. The best is to run Linux
> and try to use it.
>
> By the way, what is your expectation from Linux? I guess you
> have a wrong expectation. Linux is not Windows.
>
> Xiaofan

2008\07\10@224301 by Marcel Duchamp

picon face
Dr Skip wrote:
> I've used UNIX, then later, Linux since '79 or '80,

Whoa! Linus was born in 1969 (and December at that) so you must have had
like the totally earliest version dude!

2008\07\10@230629 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Dr Skip <KILLspamdrskipKILLspamspamgmail.com> wrote:
> I've used UNIX, then later, Linux since '79 or '80, so I don't think I have the
> wrong expectation... I personally would like to use several KDE apps under
> windows right now. KDE for Win isn't ready. There are some other neat UNIX only
> things I'd probably use too, although I could get Cygwin to do it now, just no X.

Actually you do not need KDE. Majority of the big and popular Linux
applications also run under Windows. For example, Apache/MySQL/PHP/
Python/Perl, OpenOffice, GIMP, Firefox, etc. I do not use KDE too much but
I do not see anything special in KDE you can not have under Windows with
similar or better utility. And KDE under Windows will be there if you
really like
KDE.

> Then they run Linux at home since there is little
> learning curve at that point. Then they become missionaries... ;)

To me the application is not a real big issue for home users. The drivers
are the real big issue. Many people just get frustrated when you can not get
the printer, wireless, Webcam or some other USB device, TV card, etc
to work under Linux.

For business users, then it depends on the field. I see 0 percent
of chance for me to use Linux at work any time soon, not even
5 years later, just because of the vast of Windows software we are
using and developing.

> The path to widespread Linux adoption is going to have to be evolution, not
> revolution, for the masses.

I agree.

> Vista, and fear of Vista have created an
> opportunity for Linux supporters, but like any product, it has to have the best
> perceived cost-benefit, and it has to have salesmen...

Many people say this. I do not quite agree though.

> Windows came from DOS, and they all said "I can handle DOS, I'll handle
> windows".

That would probably true for the users. Not the other way around though.

Xiaofan

2008\07\10@233000 by Dr Skip

picon face
LOL! It was UNIX way back then, then BSD and AIX in the mid '80s, and IIRC, got
hold of Slackware as my first nicely packaged distro sometime in the early
'90s. Back in the days of Uniforum.... if anyone remembers.... ;)


Marcel Duchamp wrote:
> Dr Skip wrote:
>
> Whoa! Linus was born in 1969 (and December at that) so you must have had
> like the totally earliest version dude!

2008\07\10@233943 by Dr Skip

picon face
The app I'd like to really get going is korganizer, and while there is a
windows port, it doesn't really do group anything (not exchange server - a
corporate necessity for migrating users off of outlook).... and it
unceremoniously quits quite often.

I'm not a super-fan of kde, but korganizer has the best shot of anything to
replace outlook, and the corporate world lives by outlook. Unless someone knows
of a linux/windows outlook killer replacement??


Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>
> Actually you do not need KDE. Majority of the big and popular Linux
> applications also run under Windows. For example, Apache/MySQL/PHP/
> Python/Perl, OpenOffice, GIMP, Firefox, etc. I do not use KDE too much but
> I do not see anything special in KDE you can not have under Windows with
> similar or better utility. And KDE under Windows will be there if you
> really like
> KDE.
>

2008\07\11@033206 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Jul 10, 2008, at 8:29 PM, Dr Skip wrote:

> It was UNIX way back then, then BSD and AIX in the mid '80s, and  
> IIRC, got
> hold of Slackware as my first nicely packaged distro sometime in  
> the early
> '90s. Back in the days of Uniforum.... if anyone remembers.... ;)

I remember.  In the 70s and early 80s, you pretty much had to be at a  
university to get unix; it ran on PDP/11s and then on Vaxen.  About  
the time the 68000 came out, people started to think about putting  
unix on a "personal" sized computer, but it took a while to iron out  
some of the legal issues (come to think, they're still being ironed  
out!)  Sun and HP (among others) were selling 68000 based  
workstations (aimed at single users but...) running unix by 1986 or  
1987.

The unix hater's mailing list sprung up slightly earlier, as the Dec  
mainframe people (tops20, ITS, tops10, tenex) and the lisp-machine  
people were trying to hold on for dear life as their overly-expensive  
hardware disappeared out from under them :-(

BillW  (Former dec-20 programmer.)

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2008 , 2009 only
- Today
- New search...