On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Rishikesh Tembe wrote:
> hi richard,
> just like you, i too am a newbie in linux-land, and yes, i've done
> what you asked, viz. installed both windows95 OSR2 and linux RH 5.0 on a 2
> GB hard disk. i've an old comp OK?
> as of now, both Os work fine and i've a choicce at bootup between
> win95 and linux. linux is the faster OS but as u know, there are not many
> dedicated applications for it. windows also has the slicker (but memory
> hogging! )GUI.
> regarding the installations windows is easier involving automatic
> detection os peripheral devices and hardware. linux is more technical .
> you may need to the specs of your monitor, motherboard, sound, video cards
> etc.
> if i'm not mistaken, linux has a MSDOS emulator but i've no idea
> as to how effective it is.
Don't judge the quality of GUI's based on the miserable choice RH5.0 had.
Apparently, you're looking at FVWM, also known as the Feeble Variant on a
Window Manager. Try some other WM's, such as WindowMaker, Enlightenment,
IceWM, etc. Or try one of the desktop environments, Gnome or KDE.
Part of your hardware detection stems from the same source. Upgrade to at least
RH5.2. Windows may do automatic detection and setup of hardware, but when it
gets it wrong, it royally screws up, with no way to fix it. Windows forced me
to use *interlaced* 1024x768 video! No way I could convince it
otherwise. This was unusable, and I was forced to use 800x600. Under Linux with
the same hardware, I can do 1280x1024 non-interlaced at 60Mhz.
--
Arandir...
_______________________________
<http://www.meer.net/~arandir/>
