** Reply to message from "Paul G. Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:24:56 -0700
> Honestly, I wish I could remove Vista completely. Well, I could if I > don't want to play any new games, but I've been game deprived for many, > many, many (is that too many manys? ;) ) months. Because everything uses > DX10, I'm stuck if I want to play. If you don't know, I really don't "do Windows" but I tend to follow some of what goes on in that off-world plant. I just searched for DX10 and XP and the first 7 returned links point to installing DX10 on Windows XP. So there is no reason to have waited for Vista to play games if they are just depending on DX10. BTW, is there a reason such a "gamer" as yourself is not using a new console instead of a general purpose PC for video games? > I'll have to look into this. Maybe the harder question for me is > deciding how much HDD space to leave for Vista. There's only one drive > in the machine, and I have absolutely no money to buy another one. I > could put a SCSI controller in the one PCI slot, and connect my external > SCSI drives that have a mixture of Linux and W2K formatted drives. Which > brings me to the system in question. There is no longer a need to repartition or use a 2nd disk to install Linux or that is what I get from the wubi installer. This windows application( wubi.exe ) creates a directory in your Windows filesystem for all of Linux to play in. The only other thing the installer does is add a boot entry to the existing Windows boot configuration so that Linux can be booted and run from inside of the NTFS filesystem. Installing Linux this way is going to be darn fast since there is only a small amount of indirection having a filesystem inside a filesystem on the NTFS filesystem. And your internal hard drive is probably going to be the fastest device other than adding another hard disk or partitioning. One "con" for this setup is that the Linux filesystem resides inside of the NTFS filesystem so if/when Windows implodes and if it takes out the filesystem or part of it, it could take out your Linux system too. If you never or very very seldom booted Windows, you'd probaby be fairly safe from this kind of data corruption. > Someone in the thread mentioned something about modern computers raising > the slight question as to what this system is: > > MoBo: Intel® Desktop Board DG35EC > CPU: Intel® Core 2 Duo E6750 > RAM: 4GB DDR2 Dual Channel 800MHz > Video: NVIDIA 8800 GS SLI 384MB > HDD: Brand? 300GB SATA II > DVD: Phillips DVD RW > P/S: 550W > Misc: 10 USB, 2 1394a, Realtek 6 channel audio built-in, Intel > Gigabit LAN I didn't even look to see what is supported by the latest Linux systems but that is a pretty hefty system for a desktop. 4GB of 800MHze RAM, dual core witha 1.3GHz FSB. Holy lickity splits Batman. You probably blink slower than the difference in running Linux in a VM or inside of the NTFS filesystem compared to running it on the native hardware. I'd have Windows in a VM if that was my box but this is a gamer box for you so doing Linux in the VM or in the NTFS is probably the easiest to just mess around with it. You've got a 300GB drive and I know Vista uses no more than half of that. And You could have already installed Linux on that box using a tiny part of the free space, in the time it took you to read this email. ;-) Doug -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
