Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by BarryU » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:08:45



Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to Partition
Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux a
few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how easy the
two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

Both systems can boot from a CD to install mode without requiring a boot
floppy. However, Windows is less flexible in that at no stage in the
installation procedure does it offer to help you partition your disk. With
Windows you need to find a way to pre-partition your disk (eg. FDISK,
parted, etc.) before actually installing. RH7.2 includes a nice, user
friendly disk partitioning stage during the install.

Once installed the two systems differ quite a bit in the amount of work
that still needs to be done to get the system working properly:

Display: RH7.2 correctly identified my display driver and allowed the
screen to be set to 1024x768 (my choice) with 32bit colour during the
installation. Windows installs with 768x512 256 color VGA format and you
need to install separate drivers post-installation to get the display
working correctly.

Soundcard: Yamaha-XG: Linux found the card and installed drivers, however
the drivers were poor and produced crackling sounds. Alsasound has to be
installed manually to get the sound working properly. Windows didn't spot
the sound card at all and the drivers had to be installed manually.

Network card: 10/100Mbit ethernet card: Linux spotted the card correctly
and installed the correct drivers during installation, and included dialog
for setting up the IP addresses etc. Linux still required the installation
of ADSL software post-install though to get the internet connection working
properly. Windows didn't spot the network card at all and installed modem
drivers despite there being no modem in the PC. The network card drivers
had to be installed manually as did the ADSL settings.

--
  9:53am  up 4 days, 22:39,  4 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.02, 0.00

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by BarryU » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:20:04


Oops, forgot the CD drive stuff:

Both OS's spotted my two CD drives but only Linux installed the software
required for CD burning on the CD-RW drive. Windows requires the
installation of 3rd party software post-install to allow CD's to be created.

Quote:> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to Partition
> Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux a
> few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how easy
> the two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

> Both systems can boot from a CD to install mode without requiring a boot
> floppy. However, Windows is less flexible in that at no stage in the
> installation procedure does it offer to help you partition your disk. With
> Windows you need to find a way to pre-partition your disk (eg. FDISK,
> parted, etc.) before actually installing. RH7.2 includes a nice, user
> friendly disk partitioning stage during the install.

> Once installed the two systems differ quite a bit in the amount of work
> that still needs to be done to get the system working properly:

> Display: RH7.2 correctly identified my display driver and allowed the
> screen to be set to 1024x768 (my choice) with 32bit colour during the
> installation. Windows installs with 768x512 256 color VGA format and you
> need to install separate drivers post-installation to get the display
> working correctly.

> Soundcard: Yamaha-XG: Linux found the card and installed drivers, however
> the drivers were poor and produced crackling sounds. Alsasound has to be
> installed manually to get the sound working properly. Windows didn't spot
> the sound card at all and the drivers had to be installed manually.

> Network card: 10/100Mbit ethernet card: Linux spotted the card correctly
> and installed the correct drivers during installation, and included dialog
> for setting up the IP addresses etc. Linux still required the installation
> of ADSL software post-install though to get the internet connection
> working properly. Windows didn't spot the network card at all and
> installed modem drivers despite there being no modem in the PC. The
> network card drivers had to be installed manually as did the ADSL
> settings.

--
 10:18am  up 4 days, 23:03,  4 users,  load average: 0.09, 0.05, 0.01

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Martin Kudlic » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:41:35


And don't forget once you installed applications on a different
partition under linux there is no need to ever re-install them again.
You can use them almost immediately even after a new system install. As
for Windows I only say: oh, the mysteries of a registry ...

Martin


> Oops, forgot the CD drive stuff:

> Both OS's spotted my two CD drives but only Linux installed the software
> required for CD burning on the CD-RW drive. Windows requires the
> installation of 3rd party software post-install to allow CD's to be created.

>>Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to Partition
>>Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux a
>>few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how easy
>>the two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

>>Both systems can boot from a CD to install mode without requiring a boot
>>floppy. However, Windows is less flexible in that at no stage in the
>>installation procedure does it offer to help you partition your disk. With
>>Windows you need to find a way to pre-partition your disk (eg. FDISK,
>>parted, etc.) before actually installing. RH7.2 includes a nice, user
>>friendly disk partitioning stage during the install.

>>Once installed the two systems differ quite a bit in the amount of work
>>that still needs to be done to get the system working properly:

>>Display: RH7.2 correctly identified my display driver and allowed the
>>screen to be set to 1024x768 (my choice) with 32bit colour during the
>>installation. Windows installs with 768x512 256 color VGA format and you
>>need to install separate drivers post-installation to get the display
>>working correctly.

>>Soundcard: Yamaha-XG: Linux found the card and installed drivers, however
>>the drivers were poor and produced crackling sounds. Alsasound has to be
>>installed manually to get the sound working properly. Windows didn't spot
>>the sound card at all and the drivers had to be installed manually.

>>Network card: 10/100Mbit ethernet card: Linux spotted the card correctly
>>and installed the correct drivers during installation, and included dialog
>>for setting up the IP addresses etc. Linux still required the installation
>>of ADSL software post-install though to get the internet connection
>>working properly. Windows didn't spot the network card at all and
>>installed modem drivers despite there being no modem in the PC. The
>>network card drivers had to be installed manually as did the ADSL
>>settings.

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Peter Hewet » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:59:40


BarryUL is reported to have said:
Quote:> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to Partition
> Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux a
> few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how easy
> the two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

<lots of juicy details snipped>

I agree.  My experience installing Win98 and RedHat7.1 is that both take a
bit of work, but Linux is easier.  (Easier still would be a pre-installed
OS.)

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by GreyClou » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 20:45:40



> BarryUL is reported to have said:
> > Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to Partition
> > Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux a
> > few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how easy
> > the two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

> <lots of juicy details snipped>

> I agree.  My experience installing Win98 and RedHat7.1 is that both take a
> bit of work, but Linux is easier.  (Easier still would be a pre-installed
> OS.)

It gets easier if you have installed a second blank hard drive.  I let
Redhat 7.1 have that drive and it installed perfectly.
 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 22:20:36



Quote:> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to
Partition
> Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux
a
> few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how
easy the
> two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

You don't think it's just a *LITTLE* unfair to compare an OS version
that's < 6 months old with an OS version that's 4 years old, and then
complain about being able to detect and install drivers for hardware
that probably didn't even exist back then?
 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Peter K?hlman » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 22:34:04





>> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to
> Partition
>> Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux
> a
>> few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how
> easy the
>> two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

> You don't think it's just a *LITTLE* unfair to compare an OS version
> that's < 6 months old with an OS version that's 4 years old, and then
> complain about being able to detect and install drivers for hardware
> that probably didn't even exist back then?

What happened to windows "superior hardware support"? Did it simply
vanish because W98 is slightly over 3 years old?
Ah yes, I forgot: In relativly short time it won't be supported any
longer, than it will be really just Ok for a coaster

Peter
--
Get the new Windows XP. Now with eXtra Problems included

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by mkosc » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 23:15:26





> > Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to
> Partition
> > Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux
> a
> > few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how
> easy the
> > two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

> You don't think it's just a *LITTLE* unfair to compare an OS version
> that's < 6 months old with an OS version that's 4 years old, and then
> complain about being able to detect and install drivers for hardware
> that probably didn't even exist back then?

Ahh the Windows shuffle.

Go to the XP newsgroups to see how good XP is a detecting hardware. A friend
purchased XP upgrade for W98 and XP still does not know what a SCSI is?

Also I hope you're saving your money 2003 M$ is releasing a *new* OS even
better than XP ;)

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 23:22:16






> >> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to
> > Partition
> >> Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed
Linux
> > a
> >> few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how
> > easy the
> >> two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

> > You don't think it's just a *LITTLE* unfair to compare an OS version
> > that's < 6 months old with an OS version that's 4 years old, and
then
> > complain about being able to detect and install drivers for hardware
> > that probably didn't even exist back then?

> What happened to windows "superior hardware support"? Did it simply
> vanish because W98 is slightly over 3 years old?
> Ah yes, I forgot: In relativly short time it won't be supported any
> longer, than it will be really just Ok for a coaster

Oh right, I forgot... Linux has that time travel option that allows it
to support hardware that hasn't been invented yet 4 years in the future.
 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Peter K?hlman » Thu, 21 Feb 2002 23:34:13








>> >> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to
>> > Partition
>> >> Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed
> Linux
>> > a
>> >> few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how
>> > easy the
>> >> two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

>> > You don't think it's just a *LITTLE* unfair to compare an OS version
>> > that's < 6 months old with an OS version that's 4 years old, and
> then
>> > complain about being able to detect and install drivers for hardware
>> > that probably didn't even exist back then?

>> What happened to windows "superior hardware support"? Did it simply
>> vanish because W98 is slightly over 3 years old?
>> Ah yes, I forgot: In relativly short time it won't be supported any
>> longer, than it will be really just Ok for a coaster

> Oh right, I forgot... Linux has that time travel option that allows it
> to support hardware that hasn't been invented yet 4 years in the future.

We were talking the "superior windows product" here.
You are simply avoiding the issue, as usual. Or do you suggest that there
is no such thing as a driver disk (or an update to linux, for that matter)

You are again full of it

Peter
--
The sticker on the side of the box said "Supported Platforms: Win 95,
Win NT 4.0 or better", so clearly Linux was a supported platform.

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Johan Lindqui » Fri, 22 Feb 2002 00:17:45


Wed, 20 Feb 2002 at 21:22 GMT, peering quizzically at his shoes,

Quote:> Oh right, I forgot... Linux has that time travel option that allows
> it to support hardware that hasn't been invented yet 4 years in the
> future.

Okay, who told EF about this? This was /supposed/ to be a secret,
folks. We'll never get to know these things again if we keep letting
them slip like this.

cheers,

     /Johan

--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.      Perth ---> *
 11:16pm  up 70 days,  5:43,  4 users,  load average: 2.16, 2.25, 2.31
$ cat /dev/bollocks
leverage vertical e-business

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by The Ghost In The Machin » Fri, 22 Feb 2002 00:25:50


In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch

 wrote
on Wed, 20 Feb 2002 14:20:36 -0600



>> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks
>> to Partition Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC.
>> I've installed Linux a few times on this machine recently so
>> thought I'd compare just how easy the two systems are to install
>> (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

> You don't think it's just a *LITTLE* unfair to compare an OS version
> that's < 6 months old with an OS version that's 4 years old, and then
> complain about being able to detect and install drivers for hardware
> that probably didn't even exist back then?

I'll admit you do have a point; one might try installing
RH 5.0 on similar hardware -- I think that's about 4 years back.
It's certainly some years back.

Then install Windows XP.  See which one's smoother.  :-)

--

EAC code #191       6d:01h:30m actually running Linux.
                    This is a pithy statement.  Please watch where you pith.

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by freefa » Fri, 22 Feb 2002 00:30:49



>Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to Partition
>Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed Linux a
>few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how easy the
>two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

>Both systems can boot from a CD to install mode without requiring a boot
>floppy. However, Windows is less flexible in that at no stage in the
>installation procedure does it offer to help you partition your disk. With
>Windows you need to find a way to pre-partition your disk (eg. FDISK,
>parted, etc.) before actually installing. RH7.2 includes a nice, user
>friendly disk partitioning stage during the install.

>Once installed the two systems differ quite a bit in the amount of work
>that still needs to be done to get the system working properly:

>Display: RH7.2 correctly identified my display driver and allowed the
>screen to be set to 1024x768 (my choice) with 32bit colour during the
>installation. Windows installs with 768x512 256 color VGA format and you
>need to install separate drivers post-installation to get the display
>working correctly.

>Soundcard: Yamaha-XG: Linux found the card and installed drivers, however
>the drivers were poor and produced crackling sounds. Alsasound has to be
>installed manually to get the sound working properly. Windows didn't spot
>the sound card at all and the drivers had to be installed manually.

>Network card: 10/100Mbit ethernet card: Linux spotted the card correctly
>and installed the correct drivers during installation, and included dialog
>for setting up the IP addresses etc. Linux still required the installation
>of ADSL software post-install though to get the internet connection working
>properly. Windows didn't spot the network card at all and installed modem
>drivers despite there being no modem in the PC. The network card drivers
>had to be installed manually as did the ADSL settings.

>--
>  9:53am  up 4 days, 22:39,  4 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.02, 0.00

It would be difficult for Windows 98 to have drivers on the CD for
hardware that didn't exist prior to the release.

Windows 2000 detected all hardware on install.  It automatically
updated the sound card and mouse drivers to the latest versions via
the windows update page.  I downloaded and installed the latest modem
driver from the NetComm site.  However all hardware functioned OK with
the installed drivers.

Redhat 7.2 detected all my hardware except the sound card.  However it
cannot dial the modem correctly.  I have to use a workaround to get it
to dial.  It is an old NetComm IN3400.

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Fri, 22 Feb 2002 00:44:14









> >> >> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to
> >> > Partition
> >> >> Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed
> > Linux
> >> > a
> >> >> few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just
how
> >> > easy the
> >> >> two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

> >> > You don't think it's just a *LITTLE* unfair to compare an OS
version
> >> > that's < 6 months old with an OS version that's 4 years old, and
> > then
> >> > complain about being able to detect and install drivers for
hardware
> >> > that probably didn't even exist back then?

> >> What happened to windows "superior hardware support"? Did it simply
> >> vanish because W98 is slightly over 3 years old?
> >> Ah yes, I forgot: In relativly short time it won't be supported any
> >> longer, than it will be really just Ok for a coaster

> > Oh right, I forgot... Linux has that time travel option that allows
it
> > to support hardware that hasn't been invented yet 4 years in the
future.

> We were talking the "superior windows product" here.
> You are simply avoiding the issue, as usual. Or do you suggest that
there
> is no such thing as a driver disk (or an update to linux, for that
matter)

> You are again full of it

The original poster was talking about what Win98 detected without any
updates.  Of course he could have downloaded a driver disk for his video
card.  He didn't, however and chose to compare a stock out of the box 4
year old OS against a 6 month old OS on hardware that didn't exist when
the 4 year old OS was created.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> Peter
> --
> The sticker on the side of the box said "Supported Platforms: Win 95,
> Win NT 4.0 or better", so clearly Linux was a supported platform.

 
 
 

Actually, Linux is easier to install than Windows

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Fri, 22 Feb 2002 01:32:18



> On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 14:20:36 -0600, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,



> >> Having recently trashed my Windows partition again (thanks to
> >Partition
> >> Magic!) I needed to reinstall Windows98 on my PC. I've installed
Linux
> >a
> >> few times on this machine recently so thought I'd compare just how
> >easy the
> >> two systems are to install (RedHat 7.2 vs Windows98).

> >You don't think it's just a *LITTLE* unfair to compare an OS version
> >that's < 6 months old with an OS version that's 4 years old, and then
> >complain about being able to detect and install drivers for hardware
> >that probably didn't even exist back then?

> But Windows has been developed for a lot longer than Linux.

Actually, no.  32 bit windows is 2 years younger than Linux.