On 05/12/2013 06:12 PM, Hamish wrote:
Alex wrote:
My understanding is that the +mac disables UEFI support
(something about the Mac implementation being weird and non
standard since it predates the standard),
(and AFAIU they just call it EFI not UEFI, and if you want to
regularly dual-boot the "rETIt" boot manager is your best friend)
Right but we can't expect users to have that installed just to use a
flash drive. I actually recommend Virtual Machines to modern mac users
because I know their hardware can handle it.
so yes newer machines can use it in Legacy boot mode.
I had the fun time of trying to get ubuntu 12.04.2 installed on a
new Windows 8 Acer laptop the other day. Even knowing what needed
to be done it was a complete exercise in frustration. Since
Windows was already installed as UEFI you couldn't set Legacy mode
permanently without reinstalling W8 (I'm not sure if Windows 8 will
even install without it), and to access the BIOS setting to
disable "secure" boot the search-the-forums magic command was
to set a bios supervisor passwrd first. @$#%#$%! Oh yeah, and you
had to hold the shift key down while pressing poweroff in Windows
to get it it actually shut down, instead of just quick wake from
hibernation bypassing the BIOS access time-window. I'm afraid that
simple dual booting by the general public has been made a thing of
the past, in a rather clinical fashion. :-(
I did one recently. Only secure boot had to be turned off, nothing else.
A few weeks after that, Ubuntu released Signed kernels that now work
with secure boot, so you don't even need to do that (haven't tried yet).
But I think you do need to use the 64 bit build.
But someone wanting to dual boot with a pre-installed win 8
box will have issues using that (do we really want to give
those people 32bit anyways?).
The ubuntu download page for 13.04 specifically states that
people with computers with a Windows 8 sticker on it will
need to get the 64bit version, although I think that's more
to do with their 64bit iso having UEFI support but the 32bit
version not.
Correct
there's nothing wrong with running 32bit+pae software on 64bit
hardware unless you want to run with >2gb file support. I think
any performance slowdown from the loss of registers will be
overwhelmed by the DVD or USB i/o bottleneck anyway, so not a big
deal.
Yes, I'm not really thinking about performance, but compatibility with
more machines. Though I am finding quite a few people actually install
from our release and for those I would think 64bit is a good thing.
The reason Dvds work on a Mac is that they always
boot in Legacy mode as detected by the Mac.
which is at least something, but new Macs don't come with DVD
drives, so...
Ubuntu still has 32bit because there is still plenty of
older hardware that isn't 64bit. If I though it would be
easy to apply the same hack they use to make +mac on a 32
bit build I would suggest that for max compatibility.
It may or may not work, I don't know. As for me, I'm still very
happy with my 32bit netbook for travelling/taking to conferences,
& don't excect to replace it for that role anytime soon.
Hamish
Really, I'm thinking about releasing some 64 bit options but still
primarily focusing on the 32 bit build. The big thing for me is Mac
support, several professors on my committee have Macs and are likely to
travel to places and give OSGeo Live to people, but only if they
actually see it for their own eyes on their computers. FYI, my campus is
25%+ Mac, much higher than the world at large but I think that 10% is
actually a decent number for North America and Europe (SF FOSS devs are
very Mac heavy, in fact Code for America only has Macs, which is another
group that might latch onto OSGeo Live).
Thanks,
Alex
_______________________________________________
Live-demo mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
http://live.osgeo.org
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc
