Re: [SLE] Linux Emulation under Windows
I have Linux installed on hda4 and all my other partitions (hda1, hda2, hda3, hdb1, hdb2 & hdb3) are FAT32. Is there any way of being able to run Linux from under windows.
This is a linux mailing list. Most people here would be glad to get rid of that mickeyware completely if they could. Ask in a microsoft mailing list / newsgroup. Besides, why would someone run a stable operating system on top of one that crashes all the time? Would you build a good house on quicksand?
I have win95, so vmware is not an option.
Tough. vmware is the only choice I know of so far which works reliably. It's a pretty amazing piece of software and will run linux as guest, but it will obviously only ever be as stable as whatever you run vmware on. Might be a bit slow - but as with all emulations, your choice is between good and fast. I thought vmware runs on win95? If not, perhaps that just tells you how pathetic lose95 is then, doesn't it? You can't build something solid on hot air. If you really can't run vmware, you could 1) make a dual-boot machine 2) upgrade mickey to something better 3) invest into a second computer Before you think about 3), yes linux will run on a 486 (even 386) *but* if you are only in for having a quick look at linux forget it. You will be disappointed. Think about running MS-Office 2000 on an old 486 and you get the picture. 486s are fine as a non-graphical (slowish) machine, but that doesn't feature in Billy's mind. Volker -- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/
On 14-Feb-00 Volker Kuhlmann wrote:
I have Linux installed on hda4 and all my other partitions (hda1, hda2, hda3, hdb1, hdb2 & hdb3) are FAT32. Is there any way of being able to run Linux from under windows.
This is a linux mailing list. Most people here would be glad to get rid of that mickeyware completely if they could. Ask in a microsoft mailing list / newsgroup.
Besides, why would someone run a stable operating system on top of one that crashes all the time? Would you build a good house on quicksand?
I have win95, so vmware is not an option.
Tough. vmware is the only choice I know of so far which works reliably. It's a pretty amazing piece of software and will run linux as guest, but it will obviously only ever be as stable as whatever you run vmware on. Might be a bit slow - but as with all emulations, your choice is between good and fast. I thought vmware runs on win95? If not, perhaps that just tells you how pathetic lose95 is then, doesn't it? You can't build something solid on hot air.
If you really can't run vmware, you could 1) make a dual-boot machine 2) upgrade mickey to something better 3) invest into a second computer
Before you think about 3), yes linux will run on a 486 (even 386) *but* if you are only in for having a quick look at linux forget it. You will be disappointed. Think about running MS-Office 2000 on an old 486 and you get the picture. 486s are fine as a non-graphical (slowish) machine, but that doesn't feature in Billy's mind.
Volker
Has anyone tried Bochs? There is also a freeware equivalent of VMWare, a
project that I believe is still in its early stages. Those are two other
alternatives that come to mind.
-----------------------------------
Arlen Carlson
Arlen Carlson wrote: [snip]
Has anyone tried Bochs? There is also a freeware equivalent of VMWare, a project that I believe is still in its early stages. Those are two other alternatives that come to mind.
I tried it a while ago on a Pentium 120 - NOT RECOMMENDED. You really need high-end hardware. -- George Toft http://www.georgetoft.com Certified NACSE Senior Network Specialist, Master of Science Information Systems Linux/Unix System Administrator Web Master Network Administrator --> Looking for the right job in Ontario, California <-- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Volker Kuhlmann wrote:
Think about running MS-Office 2000 on an old 486 and you get the picture. 486s are fine as a non-graphical (slowish) machine, but that doesn't feature in Billy's mind. Actually, my experience was that S.u.S.E. 5.2's X ran better than Win 3.2 (or was it 3.1?) on a 486. Can't speak in present tense, though, I took my dealer's advice (well, sort of) and upgraded my software. Never have installed Windows 9* or NT. X beat Windows on a 486, though. Never did look back. (Hmmmm, I did boot Windows up, just to see if Y2K killed it. Surprise! No! X might lack speed on an 486, but it'll work.
-- Ed Craig epcraig@efn.org Taxi Linux FreeBSD Think this through with me, let me know your mind... Hunter/Garcia -- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/
participants (4)
-
adcarlso＠visinet.ca -
epcraig＠efn.org -
grtoft＠yahoo.com -
kuhlmav＠elec.canterbury.ac.nz