1. App requests, where to go to? / 2. General question about software and safety, etc.
RodMcKay
Linux's file manager/browser since I haven't had any luck finding
anything, but was wondering if anyone knew of a good site to go to
when looking for Linux apps? Googling has turned out to be very
time-consuming and not necessarily productive. For Window$ freeware,
I have a set of freeware sites that I rely on. I'd like to know what
Linux resources others might have?
****************************
In this case, I'm also looking for a good hierarchical text editor.
In Window$ I use a really super freeware called SEONotes and hopefully
could find something equally as good in Linux. Anyone know of one
that supports clickable links and has easily customizable icons for
the nodes/notes, by any chance?
****************************
I've been battling the software issue for a couple of weeks now and
have decided that I think I can live with virtualizing 4 of my Window$
apps that I just can't live without until I absolutely find a native
Linux app. The rest I can get used to reduced functionality until I
get back up to speed with Linux "equivalents" of equal functionality.
But it's to know where to go. Linux apps aren't all that available
yet.
I'd also prefer to use only stuff I can get from the repository which
further limits things. Or does anyone feel that that's the only safe
way to go, really? I see some java-based apps out there and Window$
had made me leery, justifiably or not - I don't know, of anything that
says "java" or is it just "javascript" that is the culprit?
I would have switched to Linux many weeks ago if it weren't for the
software issue and I'm sure I'm not the only one. We Window$ users
are "used to" and really fed up with the downtimes associated with
"maintenance" on our computers (wiping/reinstalling) so I'm darned
eager to get to a much better system where I won't have those
downtimes, but don't want to have the initial period put me through
the same downtime type of thing for lack of software.
So if cross-platform is okay, would be good to know. Are any of these
apps found in the repositories (?). What if you can't find anything
and you find something that isn't available in the repository? What
do you folks do then? Since scanning for viruses doesn't seem to be
as necessary as in Window$ where we do it all the time, was wondering
how you folks approached this.
So thoughts on this would be welcome by not just me, I'm sure, but
other Window$-to-Linux users who aren't as technically knowledgeable
as you Linux gurus <vbg>.
Thanks.
ray
> In desperation I asked for any recommendations about a replacement for
> Linux's file manager/browser since I haven't had any luck finding
> anything, but was wondering if anyone knew of a good site to go to when
> looking for Linux apps? Googling has turned out to be very
> time-consuming and not necessarily productive. For Window$ freeware, I
> have a set of freeware sites that I rely on. I'd like to know what
> Linux resources others might have?
First choice: use the search function in your package manager.
>
> ****************************
> In this case, I'm also looking for a good hierarchical text editor. In
> Window$ I use a really super freeware called SEONotes and hopefully
> could find something equally as good in Linux. Anyone know of one that
> supports clickable links and has easily customizable icons for the
> nodes/notes, by any chance?
>
> ****************************
> I've been battling the software issue for a couple of weeks now and have
> decided that I think I can live with virtualizing 4 of my Window$ apps
> that I just can't live without until I absolutely find a native Linux
> app. The rest I can get used to reduced functionality until I get back
> up to speed with Linux "equivalents" of equal functionality. But it's to
> know where to go. Linux apps aren't all that available yet.
>
> I'd also prefer to use only stuff I can get from the repository which
> further limits things. Or does anyone feel that that's the only safe
> way to go, really? I see some java-based apps out there and Window$ had
> made me leery, justifiably or not - I don't know, of anything that says
> "java" or is it just "javascript" that is the culprit?
It's not necessarily that it's 'safer', but in many ways it's 'saner'
since your package manager will keep track of what is there and
associated dependencies - it should always be your first choice.
>
> I would have switched to Linux many weeks ago if it weren't for the
> software issue and I'm sure I'm not the only one. We Window$ users are
> "used to" and really fed up with the downtimes associated with
> "maintenance" on our computers (wiping/reinstalling) so I'm darned eager
> to get to a much better system where I won't have those downtimes, but
> don't want to have the initial period put me through the same downtime
> type of thing for lack of software.
>
> So if cross-platform is okay, would be good to know. Are any of these
> apps found in the repositories (?). What if you can't find anything and
> you find something that isn't available in the repository? What do you
> folks do then? Since scanning for viruses doesn't seem to be as
> necessary as in Window$ where we do it all the time, was wondering how
> you folks approached this.
>
> So thoughts on this would be welcome by not just me, I'm sure, but other
> Window$-to-Linux users who aren't as technically knowledgeable as you
> Linux gurus <vbg>.
>
> Thanks.
I'd be interested to know what apps you are talking about. There are web
sites that list many 'equivalents'.
Dan C
___________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do |
/ O O\__ NOT |
/ \ feed the |
/ \ \ trolls |
/ _ \ \ ______________|
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ \ __||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | /| | --|
| | |// |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ // |
/ _ \\ _ // | /
* / \_ /- | - | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he wiped the vomit from his chin.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Aragorn
RodMcKay wrote...
> In desperation I asked for any recommendations about a replacement for
> Linux's file manager/browser [...
There is no such thing as "Linux's filemanager". As explained to you by
others already in the other thread - which I have not replied on, given
the high degree of troll'ishness in your original post - there are
multiple desktop environments, which all have their own (default)
filemanagers, and there are multiple alternative filemanagers which one
can install alongside of those, as well as character mode filemanagers
such as Midnight Commander.
> ...] since I haven't had any luck finding anything, but was wondering
> if anyone knew of a good site to go to when looking for Linux apps?
It is generally advised to stick to the trusted repositories used by
your distribution, but if you are brave enough to roll your own stuff,
then http://sourceforge.net is a good resource.
> Googling has turned out to be very time-consuming and not necessarily
> productive. For Window$ freeware, I have a set of freeware sites that
> I rely on. I'd like to know what Linux resources others might have?
There is very little, if any, software that I need to install which
isn't already supported by the distribution itself, but in the event
that the distribution does not support it, I generally opt to get the
partaining software straight from the developer's website.
> In this case, I'm also looking for a good hierarchical text editor.
I'm not sure what you mean by "a hierarchical text editor", but just
about every GNU/Linux distribution comes loaded with editors of all
kinds, both for character mode and GUI mode. Kate/Kwrite (part of KDE)
is very good, but if you want al the bells and whistles then you could
try Xemacs.
> I've been battling the software issue for a couple of weeks now and
> have decided that I think I can live with virtualizing 4 of my Window$
> apps that I just can't live without until I absolutely find a native
> Linux app. The rest I can get used to reduced functionality until I
> get back up to speed with Linux "equivalents" of equal functionality.
> But it's to know where to go. Linux apps aren't all that available
> yet.
Every application for UNIX for which the source code is available will
run on GNU/Linux, and that's /only/ some 40 years worth of programming.
> I'd also prefer to use only stuff I can get from the repository which
> further limits things. Or does anyone feel that that's the only safe
> way to go, really? I see some java-based apps out there and Window$
> had made me leery, justifiably or not - I don't know, of anything that
> says "java" or is it just "javascript" that is the culprit?
I try to avoid Java. It's too slow. And I hate Javascript because I
don't want some webmaster deciding for me what size my browser window
should be or how new links are opened.
> I would have switched to Linux many weeks ago if it weren't for the
> software issue and I'm sure I'm not the only one. We Window$ users
> are "used to" and really fed up with the downtimes associated with
> "maintenance" on our computers (wiping/reinstalling) so I'm darned
> eager to get to a much better system where I won't have those
> downtimes, but don't want to have the initial period put me through
> the same downtime type of thing for lack of software.
I do not wish to offend you, but based upon your other thread and your
previous posts here, regardless of all the good advice you were given
in the past, I do not think that you really want GNU/Linux. You want
Windows, but without wanting to pay for it and without the risk for
viruses and without the instabilities. But you *do* want Windows, not
GNU/Linux.
> Since scanning for viruses doesn't seem to be as necessary as in
> Window$ where we do it all the time, was wondering how you folks
> approached this.
This has been explained to you already. It's not that scanning for
viruses isn't as necessary in GNU/Linux, it's *not* necessary at all.
There *are* *no* viruses for GNU/Linux in the wild, because GNU/Linux
is UNIX and the UNIX security model is completely different from the
Windows model, which - pardon my French, I normally don't swear on the
internet - is about as promiscuous as a crack whore in desperate need
of "a fix".
> So thoughts on this would be welcome by not just me, I'm sure, but
> other Window$-to-Linux users who aren't as technically knowledgeable
> as you Linux gurus <vbg>.
Windows users who are looking to escape from Microsoft but still want
Windows should direct their attention towards the various Windows-clone
efforts in existence[1] instead of wanting to embrace GNU/Linux, only
to change it into something it isn't. GNU/Linux is UNIX, and UNIX is
not Windows.
[1] In a recent discussion on this subject in another newsgroup, I have
mentioned the following initiatives:
- ReactOS (a FOSS WindowsXP clone, still in alpha stage, but fast)
- Linux Unified Kernel (a GNU/Linux system that aims for full
binary compatibility with Windows executables, including drivers)
- E/OS (a virtual machine system that supports GNU/Linux, Windows,
DOS, OS/2, BeOS and Mac OS binaries)
All of the above are still heavily under development.
--
*Aragorn*
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
Jasen Betts
>
>> In this case, I'm also looking for a good hierarchical text editor.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "a hierarchical text editor", but just
> about every GNU/Linux distribution comes loaded with editors of all
> kinds, both for character mode and GUI mode. Kate/Kwrite (part of KDE)
> is very good, but if you want al the bells and whistles then you could
> try Xemacs.
I think he may want something like the ability to collapse functions
or XML elements into a single line.
I used do that in anjuta 1.x that but the project model version 2
enforces makes it not worth the bother for the tasks I want to use it for.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
philo
> In desperation I asked for any recommendations about a replacement for
> Linux's file manager/browser since I haven't had any luck finding
> anything, but was wondering if anyone knew of a good site to go to
You ignored all the advice you were given in the last thread
so the guy who labeled you a troll appears to be correct
RodMcKay
It's just the odd thing like AutoGK and Womble DVD creator and DVD
Shrink. Plus there are my puzzle apps. These are business-related
apps and it may be that I won't find equivalents since the ones I've
found are very obscure and a couple have already disappeared since
I've found them.
I'm looking at VirtualBox so it might not be so dire.
If only I weren't a power user. If I were someone that just fired up
the computer to write the odd letter or two, updated my resume, and
looked at emails this wouldn't be so tough. But that's not the case.
My apps store folder is 14 gigs and I must admit that I struggle
constantly to keep myself limited to what will fit in there.
I'm not even a computer geek! But I am a serious power user. A 14
gigs partition for my apps _alone_ yet I believe I can pare that down
to a dozen apps if I have to since I believe that the rest will have
good enough Linux equivalents so I'll then be able to throw those
10-12 gigs of Window$ apps away.
As for that dozen or so currently "irreplaceable" Window$ apps, I'm
hoping VirtualBox turns out to be a viable alternative. If so, I can
_finally_ switch over and leave Window$ behind then eventually I'm
sure comparable Linux apps will come along once more computer users of
the world have left stupid Window$ behind. <g>
RodMcKay
I'm not offended. As, yes, Linux feels right. You're judging by
common criteria I think and I don't fit. That's okay. It's just to
get over the challenges inherent in moving over.
I don't want Window$ and I've paid for it <lol>.
It's okay. It's understandable you're concluding this.
>> Since scanning for viruses doesn't seem to be as necessary as in
>> Window$ where we do it all the time, was wondering how you folks
>> approached this.
>
>This has been explained to you already. It's not that scanning for
>viruses isn't as necessary in GNU/Linux, it's *not* necessary at all.
>There *are* *no* viruses for GNU/Linux in the wild, because GNU/Linux
>is UNIX and the UNIX security model is completely different from the
>Windows model, which - pardon my French, I normally don't swear on the
>internet - is about as promiscuous as a crack whore in desperate need
>of "a fix".
Thanks. I'm getting better at knowing the differences between the
systems. I agree with your comment re Window$. It always seemed
inherently wrong to have viruses and vulnerabilities like we do in
Window$. I'm more glad than you can know that Linux and Macs exist.
The Mac isn't the way for me but Linux seems ideal. I just have to
unlearn a lot of stuff. And that will just take time.
>> So thoughts on this would be welcome by not just me, I'm sure, but
>> other Window$-to-Linux users who aren't as technically knowledgeable
>> as you Linux gurus <vbg>.
>
>Windows users who are looking to escape from Microsoft but still want
>Windows should direct their attention towards the various Windows-clone
>efforts in existence[1] instead of wanting to embrace GNU/Linux, only
>to change it into something it isn't. GNU/Linux is UNIX, and UNIX is
>not Windows.
Nope. Linux seems just fine. Thanks.
>[1] In a recent discussion on this subject in another newsgroup, I have
> mentioned the following initiatives:
> - ReactOS (a FOSS WindowsXP clone, still in alpha stage, but fast)
> - Linux Unified Kernel (a GNU/Linux system that aims for full
> binary compatibility with Windows executables, including drivers)
> - E/OS (a virtual machine system that supports GNU/Linux, Windows,
> DOS, OS/2, BeOS and Mac OS binaries)
>
> All of the above are still heavily under development.
Hmmm, this Linux Unified Kernel, will that not be sacrificing the
things that make Linux better than Window$, though? We want to get
away from Window$, really, though not leave GUIness.
If I could start all over again, I would start with Linux and work up
from there. But that's not the way it happened I, unfortunately,
already have an existing "foundation" in terms of Window$ apps which
is all that is delaying me at this point from full conversion over.
It seems to me that temporarily using VirtualBox to run those Window$
apps we need to wean ourselves from over time might be good stop-gap
measure rather than looking towards yet another initiative such as
Linux Unified Kernel or whatever.
What does anyone here think re virtualizing via open source
VirtualBox?
RodMcKay
<ara...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>On Sunday 03 January 2010 19:17 in alt.os.linux, somebody identifying as
>RodMcKay wrote...
>
[snip]
>I'm not sure what you mean by "a hierarchical text editor", but just
>about every GNU/Linux distribution comes loaded with editors of all
>kinds, both for character mode and GUI mode. Kate/Kwrite (part of KDE)
>is very good, but if you want al the bells and whistles then you could
>try Xemacs.
Yup but they're regular text editors, not hierarchical. Xemacs may be
tabbed, but it's not hierarchical from the looks of it where tabs
exist within an _individual_ file and various sub-categories can be
included in that one file.
As a power user, I've found pretty specific apps to do just about
everything and there are certain tasks that are best handled by this
type of specific text editor.
My favourite, and believe I've tested several dozens over the years,
are SEOnote followed closely by Keynote.
These are not two tabs in two documents, they are two tabs within
_one_ doct. Hierarchical text within ONE file that can have many
"sub-documents":
http://www.freewarefiles.com/screenshot.php?programid=27173
http://www.seonote.info/Rus/screenshots/seonote-small.gif
http://www.seonote.info/screenshots/seonote-small.gif
http://www.seonote.info/screenshots/seonote.gif
http://www.freewaregenius.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/seonote_s.jpg
SEOnote has a lot more flexibility and can be customized a heck of a
lot more but Keynote has one or two good features, too.
The question of replacement apps _may_ become moot if VirtualBox turns
out to be a viable Linux solution so that we're not having to switch
back and forth (dual-boot) or having to use WINE which seems a clunky
solution.
If it were a dual-boot system, I'd be jumping back and forth so would
just end up staying with Window$ to avoid the hassles <g>.
But thought I'd clear up what the term meant.
If you've never used a hierarchical text editor like SEOnote, then
you've been using regular text editors. Each has a place but there
are uses for something like SEOnotes that nothing else can do as well.
Cheers.
[snip]
David W. Hodgins
> What does anyone here think re virtualizing via open source
> VirtualBox?
Keep in mind, that there are two different versions of VirtualBox.
There is the open source edition, that is provided by many
distributions, using a package manager, and there is a proprietary
version, which you have to download from
http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads
As far as I know, the only difference is related to usb support,
which is much better in the proprietary version.
This is one of the few packages where I recommend using the third
party version, rather then the version provided by the distribution
you choose to use.
Regards, Dave Hodgins
--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)
J.O. Aho
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 05:23:44 +0100, Aragorn
> <ara...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday 03 January 2010 19:17 in alt.os.linux, somebody identifying as
>> RodMcKay wrote...
>>
>
> [snip]
>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by "a hierarchical text editor", but just
>> about every GNU/Linux distribution comes loaded with editors of all
>> kinds, both for character mode and GUI mode. Kate/Kwrite (part of KDE)
>> is very good, but if you want al the bells and whistles then you could
>> try Xemacs.
>
> Yup but they're regular text editors, not hierarchical. Xemacs may be
> tabbed, but it's not hierarchical from the looks of it where tabs
> exist within an _individual_ file and various sub-categories can be
> included in that one file.
FreeMind, maepad, rwdhypernote, HIDAM.
--
//Aho
Whiskers
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 05:23:44 +0100, Aragorn
> <ara...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>>On Sunday 03 January 2010 19:17 in alt.os.linux, somebody identifying as
>>RodMcKay wrote...
[...]
> These are not two tabs in two documents, they are two tabs within
> _one_ doct. Hierarchical text within ONE file that can have many
> "sub-documents":
> http://www.freewarefiles.com/screenshot.php?programid=27173
>
>
> http://www.seonote.info/Rus/screenshots/seonote-small.gif
> http://www.seonote.info/screenshots/seonote-small.gif
> http://www.seonote.info/screenshots/seonote.gif
> http://www.freewaregenius.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/seonote_s.jpg
>
> SEOnote has a lot more flexibility and can be customized a heck of a
> lot more but Keynote has one or two good features, too.
[...]
I think what you are talking about is "outliners" or "mind-maps"; they may
well include some text editing ability, but that isn't what they /are/.
To Unix/Linux user, a "text editor" is precisely that.
<http://www.psychinnovations.com/psych/node/37> "Outliners and Mind Map
Software: A Really Thorough, Annotated List".
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outliner>
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Aragorn
RodMcKay wrote...
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 05:23:44 +0100, Aragorn
> <ara...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday 03 January 2010 19:17 in alt.os.linux, somebody identifying
>> as RodMcKay wrote...
>>
>>> I would have switched to Linux many weeks ago if it weren't for the
>>> software issue and I'm sure I'm not the only one. We Window$ users
>>> are "used to" and really fed up with the downtimes associated with
>>> "maintenance" on our computers (wiping/reinstalling) so I'm darned
>>> eager to get to a much better system where I won't have those
>>> downtimes, but don't want to have the initial period put me through
>>> the same downtime type of thing for lack of software.
>>
>> I do not wish to offend you, but based upon your other thread and
>> your previous posts here, regardless of all the good advice you were
>> given in the past, I do not think that you really want GNU/Linux.
>> You want Windows, but without wanting to pay for it and without the
>> risk for viruses and without the instabilities. But you *do* want
>> Windows, not GNU/Linux.
>
> I'm not offended. As, yes, Linux feels right. You're judging by
> common criteria I think and I don't fit. That's okay. It's just to
> get over the challenges inherent in moving over.
My judgment was carefully weighed, since I waited a long time before
jumping on the thread, and I had read all the other replies - including
yours.
Once again this illustrates how Windows stimulates a lazy attitude
within the user and then makes that attitude into an addiction; hard to
break free from, and you don't know what to do if you do break free
from it, because the IT world as you know it (through the Microsoft
indoctrination) is an illusion, but you can't see the reality yet.
I see this with a lot of newbies, so if it's any consolation, you're not
the only one with that problem. <grin>
>>> Since scanning for viruses doesn't seem to be as necessary as in
>>> Window$ where we do it all the time, was wondering how you folks
>>> approached this.
>>
>> This has been explained to you already. It's not that scanning for
>> viruses isn't as necessary in GNU/Linux, it's *not* necessary at all.
>> There *are* *no* viruses for GNU/Linux in the wild, because GNU/Linux
>> is UNIX and the UNIX security model is completely different from the
>> Windows model, which - pardon my French, I normally don't swear on
>> the internet - is about as promiscuous as a crack whore in desperate
>> need of "a fix".
>
> Thanks. I'm getting better at knowing the differences between the
> systems. I agree with your comment re Window$. It always seemed
> inherently wrong to have viruses and vulnerabilities like we do in
> Window$. I'm more glad than you can know that Linux and Macs exist.
> The Mac isn't the way for me but Linux seems ideal. I just have to
> unlearn a lot of stuff. And that will just take time.
In my humble opinion, it would be easier for you to start with a fresh
GUI then, and not with one that looks like Windows, because that will
only feed your addiction again and confuse you, since after all, it
isn't Windows and thus won't behave the same way.
>> [1] In a recent discussion on this subject in another newsgroup, I
>> [have mentioned the following initiatives:
>> - ReactOS (a FOSS WindowsXP clone, still in alpha stage, but fast)
>> - Linux Unified Kernel (a GNU/Linux system that aims for full
>> binary compatibility with Windows executables, including
>> drivers)
>> - E/OS (a virtual machine system that supports GNU/Linux, Windows,
>> DOS, OS/2, BeOS and Mac OS binaries)
>>
>> All of the above are still heavily under development.
>
> Hmmm, this Linux Unified Kernel, will that not be sacrificing the
> things that make Linux better than Window$, though?
I have no experience with it - and no need for it either - so I can't
really say how that works. I presume that it's just a way of doing
without Wine for Windows compatibility, and of allowing Windows drivers
to run "natively" on GNU/Linux, but that in overall, the UNIX
personality of GNU/Linux will remain.
> We want to get away from Window$, really, though not leave GUIness.
The first thing you have to realize about the GUI is that it is only one
of the different user interfaces offered to you by a UNIX system, and
that it should therefore also only be used for a subset of the tasks
you need to do at a computer - especially when it concerns system
administration, for which the commandline and an editor are often the
best approaches.
In Windows, the GUI is your *only* user interface, and so you are
accustomed and addicted to using the GUI only. You take the GUI for
granted. In UNIX, the GUI is a toolbox with loads of neat tools, but
it's just one aspect of the system, and many people run without one.
Servers for instance are usually not even installed with an X server
and a desktop environment, and they are administered remotely via /ssh/
or via a web-based interface.
What Windows does, first and foremost, is hide the nitty-gritty of the
operating system from the user, and many users may like that since
they're not technically savvy. UNIX systems don't hide anything -
albeit that a lot of distro makers are trying very hard to make it into
a Windows clone by automatically booting up to a display manager and
hiding the boot-up and init messages underneath some fancy graphical
framebuffer splash screen. In UNIX, you are exposed to the raw aspects
of the system, because this is *necessary* in order for you to have
control over your system and know what's going on. In Windows, this
isn't necessary, because they count on you calling the paid Microsoft
support service if you need anything done.
Or otherwise put, and more crudely, UNIX (and thus GNU/Linux) is a real
computer operating system. It's technical, but then again, computers
*are* technical. Windows on the other hand is not a computer operating
system. It only pretends to be one. In reality, it's a powerful tool
to keep you dependent on corporate support and subjected to corporate
power structures. That's why the business world still heavily relies
on Microsoft - especially for desktops - while the scientific and
technical world has been relying on UNIX from day one.
> If I could start all over again, I would start with Linux and work up
> from there. But that's not the way it happened I, unfortunately,
> already have an existing "foundation" in terms of Window$ apps which
> is all that is delaying me at this point from full conversion over.
As tough as it sounds, you're going to have to throw away that
foundation because it is a flawed foundation from the ground up -
always has been, always will be. You have to forget everything you've
learned in Windows, because that's all miseducation.
> It seems to me that temporarily using VirtualBox to run those Window$
> apps we need to wean ourselves from over time might be good stop-gap
> measure rather than looking towards yet another initiative such as
> Linux Unified Kernel or whatever.
There is also Wine if the applications you need are not too demanding -
i.e. they cannot have direct access to the hardware or to kernel
functions. Should they require such functionality, then virtualization
is more recommended, of course.
This is something you'll have to decide on for yourself, because
virtualization will use up more resources than anything running on top
of Wine.
> What does anyone here think re virtualizing via open source
> VirtualBox?
Never used it, but many people in the groups I'm subscribed to agree
that it's a very good virtual machine monitor. Some say it's better
than VMWare even, albeit that I have no experience with VMWare either.
My interests in virtualization lie with Xen, which is an entirely
different thing.
Virtual machine monitors like VirtualBox or VMWare run on top of a host
operating system, while Xen is a bare metal hypervisor. Xen does
support Windows "guests" - in fact, on Xen everything is a guest,
including the management system - but only so if the hardware has
virtualization extensions and they are enabled in the BIOS.
Xen might be overkill for your needs, albeit that it's not too
resource-hungry. VirtualBox would probably be a better solution for
you.
Dan C
<SNIP>
> If only I weren't a power user.
LOL! ROFL! That's friggin hilarious!
Bugger off, you Win-droid troll boy. You suck even as a troll.
--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he reinstalled TLX 3.1.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Thanks, Obama: http://brandybuck.site40.net/pics/politica/thanks.jpg