Win 7 installation!

[deeaa]

Got the win7 OEM 64bit and a 64gb SSD drive...just got pretty much everything installed. Man it was an easy install! Pretty much everything worked just like that. I was able to quickly find drivers for everything that needed; printer, scanner, USB phone, both soundcards, KORG mixer, Shuttle jog, everything works superbly.

On Cubase front, sadly direct-x effects are no longer supported. VST works well. Another thing, my Creative Prodikeys keyboard is not supported any more...so swapped to an MS media keyboard. Will have to buy something like the Korg Nano Key for synth playing I guess.

But anyhow...man it's quick now. Windows boots in 5-10 seconds and no waiting at desktop for anything to finish loading. Cubase etc. start in mere seconds as opposed to up to 20 seconds on Xp. Also tried it with just 2G and it seems 2G is just too little for 64bit...4 gigs really makes a helluva difference in speed. In Xp & 32bit Vista more than 2 gigs just makes things slower but in 64bit no more. Makes me want to go for more mem.

Office 2007 works like a charm too...well everything does it seems. iTunes is the only one that crashed (of course, it's Apple), but aside that no problems.

All in all, fine OS. Of course I had to do stuff like reduce icon size, define different places for stuff like documents on what drive etc. and show file suffixes etc...but all pretty standard stuff. The only thing I would gripe about is the change in 'start' menu which now just has everything under one list that expands vertically when need be. Much preferred the old start menu.

So, well recommend it!

Machine: Core2 3.0Ghz @3,61Ghz, 4gb 1066MHz mem, 64GB SSD, 2x500G Sata2, 1x1T sata2, Ati HD4850.

[red]

Nice review, good to know about Cubase.
I'll stick to Ardour on my Gentoo and Slackware Linux systems though :thankyou.

[deeaa]

I checked out Ardour - never had come accross that. Looks very nice indeed! I run Ubuntu on one machine which is basically just for surfing the web, but this software at least looks like it would quite well do the job.

Linux is way cool in my book. Every now and then I've tried to swap to Linux as my main OS, and I guess the only reason I haven't been successful is I'm just not competent enough with them...you know, too restless to ever read any manuals etc, I want to be able to just learn by using. Whenever I try Linux it turns into me asking for tips on forums how to do this and that and I have no clue of the commands I then write in the terminal to do something :-) and it never ends well. I fear it might not be too easy to compile this ardour software to use VST etc. Even on Win7, to get the VST system to work I actually just copied my VST plugs to every directory that looked like it could be where the programs read them - turned out to be /Program Files x86/common/Steinberg/VstPlugins, LOL...I was too lazy to even look that up somewhere, just rather went ahead and tried. Not an approach that works in Linux :thwap

But it'd be very nice to run Linux as it's free and all. A few back I had this Linux user guru at my place to help set up a Linux system and we worked a few days on it but ultimately, I dunno, there was still too much I couldn't get to work at all, like scanner and printer and DV camera connection.

If I had to start from scratch or build a studio machine for a company for instance, I'l definitely try to go Linux all the way...but once you have paid for Windows and bought a lot of hardware without thinking if it works in other OS's as well and gotten well used to it, it's tough to make a change...and you don't really feel a need to make a change. But yeah, every Linux system I've tried or used on my machine as 2nd OS have had something that makes me want to go back and try if I could live with one again. Especially OS's like Ubuntulinux easily make Xp 32bit look very primitive, slow, ugly and clumsy. But for a change now Win7 on the other hand is on par or better for a while now to use. No doubt Linux will quickly improve again on it, though.

I suppose it's simultaneously a blessing and a curse for Linux to have so much variation and several totally different distros...makes it very hard for a casual user to survive with one as all support and guides etc. are spread over so many distros. If there were only a few, it might work better for us non-professionals.

[red]

I suppose it's simultaneously a blessing and a curse for Linux to have so much variation and several totally different distros...makes it very hard for a casual user to survive with one as all support and guides etc. are spread over so many distros. If there were only a few, it might work better for us non-professionals.
Quite the contrary, once you learn the basics all UNIX systems are pretty much the same (all Linuxes, BSDs, Solaris, etc.). There's more that changes from one Windows version to the next than what's different between distros or versions of Linux.

And you're really not required to be an expert these days, though it obviously helps to be one. They've even made a special Linux distribution for musicians: Ubuntu Studio (http://ubuntustudio.org/).

There's really not that much to read. You read the stuff once, configure your system, and then forget about it. It just works. And you don't ever even need an antivirus with Linux - it's simply immune :).

[ibanezjunkie]

i dont like Win7, i had it on BETA for about a month, hated it.

it still has most of the same annoying problems as vista, but its faster.

Win7 wasn't compatible with any of my USB stuff, and its still as overcomplicated as vista.

WHY cant they just make new service packs for XP, or build on 98/2000.

[deeaa]

Change is always difficult...I bought a machine with Vista a few years back and I hated the OS immensely...but during the year or so I used it I slowly tweaked it to suit my use and by the end of the year it was working very well and quick too. And when I got a new laptop with Xp Pro again...well I was amazed how clumsy and restrictive Xp feels now. Now that I went Win7 I was able to really quickly adjust it to my liking and I love it now, there's simply no going back. System is roughly three times quicker, searches and such almost immediate and it seems rock steady.

Back when Xp came along I well remember how people wrote on and on about how they much preferred 98 or even win3.11 and such...one friend of mine still uses W2000k.

Change is not always just for better; sure there are some downgrades...but all in all, can't resist the change...better move along with it as some day we must when we find the old systems simply don't work no more.

[deeaa]

Quite the contrary, once you learn the basics all UNIX systems are pretty much the same (all Linuxes, BSDs, Solaris, etc.). There's more that changes from one Windows version to the next than what's different between distros or versions of Linux.

And you're really not required to be an expert these days, though it obviously helps to be one. They've even made a special Linux distribution for musicians: Ubuntu Studio (http://ubuntustudio.org/).

There's really not that much to read. You read the stuff once, configure your system, and then forget about it. It just works. And you don't ever even need an antivirus with Linux - it's simply immune :).

Yeah, it does seem very very tempting...but I dunno, it just seems whenever I try it always ends up horribly wrong. I do, or rather did, use UNIX at the University nearly 20 years back quite a lot so I understand something of how it works...but I dunno. It just feels wrong like on Macs, I don't have a clear image in my head in which folder and where this and that file and shortcut physically lies...but I guess I'll try it again some of these days, yeah...

[red]

better move along with it as some day we must when we find the old systems simply don't work no more.
With respect, that's circular logic. Systems will work for as long as there's a critical mass of users that prefer them. Microsoft makes it's decisions according to the market, not the other way around. If most people continue to use XP, for example, and refuse to upgrade to Vista or Windows 7, or to buy computers where they come pre-installed, then Microsoft can't help but continue to support XP.

We should be aware of our rights and power as consumers.

[deeaa]

Red: I feel I need to clarify a little on the difficulties I have with Ubuntu for instance. I have this Ubuntu box here, and as it's used for almost only surfing, it works fine.

BUT there are some issues. For instance, whatever I try I can't change the monitor resolution to the correct one and as a result the TFT screen looks horrible. It's 1280x1024 very basic Viewsonic screen, but there is no equivalent resolution available on the drivers. I once followed to the point somebody's examples on edited X config files, but no. It just won't work.

Another is, I bought my last printer, Samsung, er, 2010 I think? 30? Anyway, it said it's Linux compatible right on the box. And it _almost_ works...only every time I print I first get like 3-5 pages that have some random scribbles on 'em and then the actual print.

Then I can't get digital audio input to work on my soundcard, or rather, it works but it won't sync on it or accept it as sync reference so I can't use my DBX preamps with it.

There's a lot of issues like this...also have had problems in mounting NTFS drives and whatnot, non-working video (DV) cams - I can hear sound but no video from the device...etc. etc...seems every single thing I try, there's no solution. No drivers for scanner, camera, some USB sticks...

I've tried also compiling my own kernel for one soundcard (didn't work) and I know Linux is supposed to be stable, but once I managed to somehow install stuff I couldn't find from synaptic even by adding repositories - from tarballs etc. and that led to some driver overlap/I don't know what but it caused the whole synaptic system just fart out...and I had to just erase the whole system and re-install everything so it would even boot.

I guess I'm just unlucky but yeah, I'm very very sceptical on Linux ever finding a proper home in my system.

[deeaa]

With respect, that's circular logic. Systems will work for as long as there's a critical mass of users that prefer them. Microsoft makes it's decisions according to the market, not the other way around. If most people continue to use XP, for example, and refuse to upgrade to Vista or Windows 7, or to buy computers where they come pre-installed, then Microsoft can't help but continue to support XP.

We should be aware of our rights and power as consumers.

Quite right...but then again, I think most people will upgrade anyway. That's just the way people are. There will be new systems, 128bit is around corner already, new pci-e-x-whatever systems, different processor architectures, miniature kernel systems, you name it...and of course direct-x-11 is here now so I guess even I will just have to go and buy me a new display card to run the latest dx11 games too.

A horse carriage is in many respects much safer and better and cleaner and whatnot than a car, but still you need a modern car these days to drive safely on the highways...maybe poor analogy, but everything evolves.

Where would Linux be today if nobody had come up with the X interface for instance...you can only carry on with something a limited time..and xp, let's face it, is already prehistoric in computer development timescale.

[red]

I guess I'm just unlucky but yeah, I'm very very sceptical on Linux ever finding a proper home in my system.
You're not unlucky, you're just not prepared to deal with non-trivial Linux issues. There's certainly nothing wrong with that, you could ask somebody who knows better to troubleshoot your problems for you, or install a different Linux distro, or have more patience and read a couple of HOWTOs.

All my devices work just fine on my Linux systems: USB sticks, Canon camera (via USB), my Audigy 2 soundcard which I use with Ardour, my Epson printer (with the CUPS system).

From what you write, most of your problems seem to stem from an improper selection of drivers for X (the base graphical system in Linux), your printer, and your other devices. In systems like Ubuntu, you don't really need to re-compile the kernel, the default kernel usually comes with almost everything already compiled, but as a kernel module. You need to load the modules with modprobe or insmod, or make sure that your devices are plugged in at boot time (some of them will be detected automatically that way, if they're not seen immediately). I'd never recommend re-compiling the kernel to a beginner.

For the printer, try to use CUPS. If it's properly installed on your system, you should be able to access a nice graphical interface if you just start your browser and type "http://localhost:631" in the address bar (more details here (http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L274)). The rest will be pretty self explanatory.

For your X driver, you should try to edit your /etc/xorg.conf file, and select a proper driver for your video card. Most likely, that's what prevents you from properly using your monitor. There are detailed monitor settings there as well, so you can tweak that too. To troubleshoot X issues, check the log text file /var/log/Xorg.0.log.

I know it can sound a bit scary, but once you're done that's all.

[red]

A horse carriage is in many respects much safer and better and cleaner and whatnot than a car, but still you need a modern car these days to drive safely on the highways...maybe poor analogy, but everything evolves.
A horse carriage seems to me to be very unsafe in an accident (for the lack of seatbelts alone, if nothing else), clearly more uncomfortable (no suspensions as fas as I know, and no heating), and as clean as a car owned by the same person would probably be.

As for the comparison, not sure what the carriage is (XP? Linux?), but I would argue that if the upgrade makes your system slower and impairs the way essential applications (such as Cubase might be for you) work, I would say that "evolution" is not the word I'd use.

But that's just me. I'm not advocating that you switch to Linux, or to XP for that matter. As long as you're happy with your system, it's all that matters in the end.


Where would Linux be today if nobody had come up with the X interface for instance...you can only carry on with something a limited time..and xp, let's face it, is already prehistoric in computer development timescale.
The Linux/X question does not make sense. Actually Linux's full name is GNU/Linux. Linux ended up being the kernel of an OS designed by Richard Stallman, and took over the name of the OS because it sounded shorter and better than GNU/Linux (though technically, the correct name is GNU/Linux). It has been designed from the beginning to provide a graphical user interface, so there was never a moment when nobody thought to "invent" X.

As for "you can only carry on with something a limited time" - that's a broad axiom that does not seem to apply to spouses or vintage Gibson and Martin guitars. It does tend to happen with things that are not that well made though, I agree with you there. They break too much too often and were not designed to scale properly.

[red]

Another is, I bought my last printer, Samsung, er, 2010 I think? 30? Anyway, it said it's Linux compatible right on the box. And it _almost_ works...only every time I print I first get like 3-5 pages that have some random scribbles on 'em and then the actual print.
Actually this might happen because you accidentaly hit the Print Screen button sometime before printing. It happens to me too occasionally, and tends to happen more to people who have the Print Screen button immediately above Page Up. When you hit print screen in a terminal such as Eterm, a print job is queued. If you printer is turned off at the time, nothing happens but CUPS has it in it's print queue on disk (files in /var/spool/cups). When you then try to print something and turn on the printer, CUPS prints everything it had in it's queue, and then your current print order.

You should check if any files are present in /var/spool/cups before printing. If there are any, you can simply delete them and restart cupsd, then ask your computer to print.

[bigG]

I am SO not computer savvy! I'm still running Wndows XP that was loaded in this HP PC when new in 2001. It is, for me, VERY comforting to know that Windows 7, when I will certainly HAVE TO adopt it, is so user friendly w few bugs. XP has been good to my fragile little mind...:happy

[deeaa]

The Linux/X question does not make sense. Actually Linux's full name is GNU/Linux. Linux ended up being the kernel of an OS designed by Richard Stallman, and took over the name of the OS because it sounded shorter and better than GNU/Linux (though technically, the correct name is GNU/Linux). It has been designed from the beginning to provide a graphical user interface, so there was never a moment when nobody thought to "invent" X.

As for "you can only carry on with something a limited time" - that's a broad axiom that does not seem to apply to spouses or vintage Gibson and Martin guitars. It does tend to happen with things that are not that well made though, I agree with you there. They break too much too often and were not designed to scale properly.

Well it depends...I'm on my third wife and sold my old LP after playing it 12 years :-) and always been happy to move on...LOL

But yeah, I know, and Linux part comes from Linus Torvalds who was a finnish student here at the time I started studying some IT courses and still rules what goes into the kernel today. I remember him well, in the time when he was starting to become famous overseas, there was a picture of him in the student paper where he was drinking beer outta bottle in his undies :happy .

[deeaa]

For your X driver, you should try to edit your /etc/xorg.conf file, and select a proper driver for your video card. Most likely, that's what prevents you from properly using your monitor. There are detailed monitor settings there as well, so you can tweak that too. To troubleshoot X issues, check the log text file /var/log/Xorg.0.log.

I know it can sound a bit scary, but once you're done that's all.

Yeah, that's what I've been trying...it's an NVidia card GF5xxx something I recall...it is correctly listed and all, but for some reason the controls are just grayed out in the selection panel. In the xorg config file, if I set the correct resolution, it also requires some frequency setting, and despite I received a xorg file from someone using the same card and that worked, I don't know, maybe my monitor is different revision/different Vsync or whatever...I don't remember very well, it's been like 6 months since I last tried to work it. Anyway, I worked on it for a week back then and finally got so mad at it I just keep it at 1024x and suffer :-)

[red]

I remember him well, in the time when he was starting to become famous overseas, there was a picture of him in the student paper where he was drinking beer outta bottle in his undies :happy .
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/logos/pictures/linus2.gif

[deeaa]

LOL yeah that exact picture! Nice job finding it right off the bat!

[red]

Yeah, that's what I've been trying...it's an NVidia card GF5xxx something I recall...it is correctly listed and all, but for some reason the controls are just grayed out in the selection panel.
Well, the NVidia thing is like this: there's a default X driver called nv, and there's the driver actually made by NVidia, called nvidia. The driver from NVidia is probably not installed on your system by default (just guessing, I've never used Ubuntu myself). You can find it here (http://www.nvidia.com/object/unix.html).

After it's installed, you need to change this:


Section "Device"
# [...]
Driver "nv"
# [...]
EndSection

to this:


Section "Device"
# [...]
Driver "nvidia"
# [...]
EndSection

There might be other settings you need to change in xorg.conf, but that's the essential part.

[deeaa]

BTW I once read a very interesting book titled 'transparency' something, and it dealt with why and based on what people prefer a certain OS...it was a very interesting read, quite a scientific book too, and it drew some interesting comparisons to different ways people like to organize their entire universes, remember things and whatnot, and those differences indicate also what do these people like in their OS's.

One thing that just dawned on me about Linux etc. as well is...if you buy a mac or use a Linux...then, there would be no need to keep upgrading the machine.

Me, I love upgrading my machine. Every component in it has been overclocked and equipped with cooling systems, hell I even have internal lighting inside my case.

It's such a thrill to plan and execute a new system build for instance, install different types of drives and plan how to arrange partitions, F: goes into first partition and keeps music, 1st DVD is X and second Y:...and then plan where to route backups and how and also where to store what type temp files, on which partition is the swap file and so on.

I instinctly hate it for instance if I don't see exactly where my music files are, or get to decide it. The first time I used iTunes, I was shocked that the thing _took over_ how I keep my music files. I have separate folders for rock, classical, etc. arranged just the way I like, and in perfectly sized HD partitions (like 120G to match iPod size) and so on. Even on windows it annoys me immensely if some programs install parts and configs every which way, and try to find out if there are tweaks to allow installing applications so that they make no changes I don't want in system registry or whatever. I never keep my documents in my documents folder or music in my music, etc.

I always plan what size HD's I have and where; like on my laptop I have 160GB of drive, and my desktop has 1T plus 64G so I need a terabyte backup drive and also a 50G online backup drive and a 160G backup drive...

Well you get the picture.

But it's one of the best parts of the PC...you can use it to do serious work one second, and to chill out you can get a new dx11 display card, find some bootleg turbo drivers for it, overclock the card all to hell and see if you can beat the scores of the next guy in Call of Duty timedemo :-)

That's something a mac or linux just doesn't have.

[red]

BTW I once read a very interesting book titled 'transparency' something, and it dealt with why and based on what people prefer a certain OS...it was a very interesting read, quite a scientific book too, and it drew some interesting comparisons to different ways people like to organize their entire universes, remember things and whatnot, and those differences indicate also what do these people like in their OS's.
I completely agree, and that is exactly why I've kept saying that Linux is my preference, and that I'm not advocating that anyone switch to anything else that they're not comfortable with.

Since you've offered some of your reasons for chosing Windows, here are some of my reasons for liking Linux better:

it's completely free. :happy
so far, there was nothing I wanted to do on a Windows machine that I couldn't do on a Linux machine. This includes working with MS Office documents and running Windows games I was interested in using the Wine emulation software.
because most free software is also open source, I can know exactly what the software does by reading it's source code. Provided I'm able to, I can also fix a bug myself rather than wait for the company that wrote the software to consider my bug report.
there are virtually no viruses for Linux. That means no need for an antivirus. That means that, all other things being equal, a Linux system will run faster because there's no need to scan every file before execution, or run background antivirus update processes.
I have complete control over my computer. The Windows philosophy seems to be "don't worry your pretty little head with grown-up stuff". It makes a real fuss about letting you under the hood. With Linux, you're practically driving without a hood cover.
the human element involved: there's no central business making Linux. You can't buy Linux out or shut it down. It's people all over the world making a contribution, and it all adds up to something big enough to compete with products from companies like Microsoft and Apple. It really gives you hope that collaboration is possible and human nature is fundamentally good. There's very little incentive for most of the people writing that code. Most of them actually pay out of their own pocket to contribute.
constantly upgrading and throwing stuff out is aggressive on the environment. Having one computer that you don't need to upgrade for a longer period of time helps with the human waste and global warming problems.
and, yes, you've got me: I don't like upgrading my computers. I don't like having to fork over the extra money, and I don't like cutting my hands on the PC case. I prefer to use that money for music gear :cool:.

I do occasionally boot up Windows XP if I really need something in Cubase or some site only works with Internet Explorer, but that happens once every 6 months or so.

[deeaa]

Yes, all your reasons are very good ones, and also reasons why I'd love to love linux :-) I agree with everything except that I don't think windows keeps you away from the system settings. Yes, they are hidden from a casual user, but they're there quite easily accessible and I'd say the basic 'building blocks' and functions are easier to understand than Linux.

Except on a higher level, which becomes another story...drivers etc. are closed stuff while on linux it's open-source. But that goes into engineering level stuff. Sort of like those NVidia drivers, LOL ;-)

I'll have to get back at the NVidia issue. I do believe I did does run the NVidia drivers...at least it has a proper 'NVidia' control panel window with the logo and all.

[red]

I agree with everything except that I don't think windows keeps you away from the system settings. Yes, they are hidden from a casual user, but they're there quite easily accessible and I'd say the basic 'building blocks' and functions are easier to understand than Linux.
Well, you have to dig for it, which means that Windows is not advanced-user-friendly by design, whereas Linux is. And let me put it this way: most Windows applications use the Windows registry for their settings, and most Linux applications use plain text files with nice comments. Have you tried to walk around the registry settings tree with regedit.exe lately? :)


I'll have to get back at the NVidia issue. I do believe I did does run the NVidia drivers...at least it has a proper 'NVidia' control panel window with the logo and all.
If you have the nvidia-settings utility then the drivers should be installed, but you need to make sure they're actually used by X (look it up in xorg.conf). Just ran it on my computer and the resolution list is not greyed out.

[deeaa]

Hey Red,

Here's what's in my xorg for display:

Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "Unknown"
ModelName "Unknown"
HorizSync 28.0 - 33.0
VertRefresh 43.0 - 72.0
Option "DPMS"
EndSection

Section "Device"
Identifier "Device0"
Driver "nvidia"
VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation"
EndSection


But when I launch the NVidia X server settings in system/tools menu it says:

"You do not appear to be using NVidia x driver. Type nvidia-xconfig as root."

Then I do that in terminal and get an error sayin I need a 'driver line' in xorg config file, and that's it. I get 1152x or 1362x resolutions and the 1024 that I use normally, but still no way to select the 1280x which is what the monitor uses (Viewsonic VA902).

And the NVidia settings panel window still claims...you don't appear to be using NVidia driver...yet it does show the logo and all where you can change resolutions.

I'd post a picture but I don't know how to take screenshots in Ubuntu or if there is some picture editor somewhere here I could use or an FTP client either for posting it.

[red]

Then I do that in terminal and get an error sayin I need a 'driver line' in xorg config file, and that's it. I get 1152x or 1362x resolutions and the 1024 that I use normally, but still no way to select the 1280x which is what the monitor uses (Viewsonic VA902).

I'd post a picture but I don't know how to take screenshots in Ubuntu or if there is some picture editor somewhere here I could use or an FTP client either for posting it.
Can you paste the exact error about the Driver line? Pasting is done by selecting the text in your terminal, and then middle-mouse-click in the forum reply text box. If that doesn't work, try Ctrl-Ins in the terminal after selecting the text to copy it, and then Shift-Ins to paste.

You can take screenshots in Linux with xv. Just run xv, then right-click on the xv window to make the menu appear, then click the "Grab" button, check "Hide XV window" in the dialog window that pops up, then click "Grab", then click left mouse button in the window you want to capture as a screenshot (or the desktop if you want the whole screen). Then just save the picture as a JPG file and you're done. Alternatively, you can use gimp if you have that installed. That has a capture screen utility somewhere in the menu as well.

As for your monitor resolution, you should find your monitor manual and fill in the correct values for your monitor as well in xorg.conf. For example, for my CTX monitor I have:

HorizSync 30 - 64
VertRefresh 40-90
That is, a wider range of available frequencies.

You should also check your "Screen" section settings. Mine has this in:

DefaultDepth 24
# "1024x768" is also a conservative usable default resolution. If you
# have a better monitor, feel free to try resolutions such as
# "1152x864", "1280x1024", "1600x1200", and "1800x1400" (or whatever your
# card/monitor can produce)

Subsection "Display"
Depth 24
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
EndSubsection

[red]

Then I do that in terminal and get an error sayin I need a 'driver line' in xorg config file, and that's it.
Somebody mentions a utility called Envy (link) (http://albertomilone.com/nvidia_scripts1.html) on a Ubuntu forum. Maybe that can help you out faster?

[deeaa]

Aargh...I tried to change the xorg file...I found the correct refresh values and edited them there, and added suitable resolutions, then it wanted me to restart, and upon restart it pondered for many minutes and then gave options to run in low resolution or revert to older settings...anyway, now I'm reduced to 800x600 :-(

Now I'm waiting for the system to download something, updates I guess, which will take ten minutes.

I tried to install that Envy thing that looks promising...but I don't know how to install it. It asks for a path to envy's deb packages and to make sure multiverse and universe are accessible. I checked from synaptic, afaik they are. I also apparently did install the thing, I don't understand though why does everything have to be written in such weird language in Ubuntu...really making my blood boil by now. AAAGH! If only I could just google something and double-click to install I'd be a happy man...OK have to calm down, but it's just once again I've fought for close to two hours with this damned OS and gotten nothing but worse than I started with...:thwap I have to get back to sorting out where are those files now and try to finish the installation.

[deeaa]

Now I'm back to this:

sudo nvidia-xconfig
[sudo] password for dee:

Using X configuration file: "/etc/X11/xorg.conf".

VALIDATION ERROR: Data incomplete in file /etc/X11/xorg.conf.
Device section "Configured Video Device" must have a Driver
line.

Backed up file '/etc/X11/xorg.conf' as '/etc/X11/xorg.conf.backup'
New X configuration file written to '/etc/X11/xorg.conf'


Currently I can only get 800x or 600x. I guess I need to re-edit the xorg to get back to 1024x first and then try with the vrefresh etc. values, except I worry it'll just restart the whole machine when I restart X and then boot up in safe mode graphics again...

[deeaa]

Jeez...OK, I guess I found the envy package installation...of course it's not shown anywhere but I used find and then got properties for the deb package and finally saw it's in /var/cache/apt/archives...so now I'll try it...FINALLY something that looks promising...it's asking me to restart the system now so thumbs up...!

[deeaa]

WHoa that was scary.

It rebooted, then complained about something cryptic. Then it went into terminal mode and asked to login. Then I got this EGA graphics screen about x server 0,1 and selection. Then it went into a loop reporting something that display has crashed, do you want to try another (1) and then it went into 'there appears to be x session on display 0, using display 1' and then it looped for a while and then reported having restarted six times and there appears to be a problem...and then it restarted, got back to normal Ubuntu and now I have 1024x back. So I'm at least exactly where I begun the ordeal :-)

Gotta be happy about that. But no way I'm gonna try and muck around this stuff for a while now. I have better ideas to spend sundays than fighting Linus, LOL.

Well, this is exactly how pretty much everything works for me in Linux systems...pretty much exactly the same with any driver I try to get to work; battle it for a couple of hours writing magic commands here and there and such, and then finally crash the whole system. I just can't even begin to compare it with the ease Windows systems work in similar tasks. Google, double-click, done 99,9% of times. Not working? Try another option and that'll take care of the 0,1 occasions.

But luckily now it didn't crash permanently and I didn't have to reinstall the whole Ubuntu. I'll just let it be at 1024x although it IS looking like a well-worn CRT tube since it's not native resolution for the display...but not worth the trouble.

[Kazz]

Uh I thought Linus Torvalds invented Linux?

[red]

Gotta be happy about that. But no way I'm gonna try and muck around this stuff for a while now. I have better ideas to spend sundays than fighting Linus, LOL.
I'm sorry it wasn't easy to fix. I'd offer to help out more, but I can only guess so much without actual access to your particular computer, and you should never give root access to your computer to unknown people on Internet forums :).

You should not need to reboot your machine just for X server configuration changes. Only X should be restarted.

If you want to troubleshoot more, you could modify the way your Ubuntu starts, and make it start in console-mode only (without a graphical interface). Somebody explained how it can be done here (link) (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=959527&postcount=3). Then, when your computer starts up, it won't try to start your X system automatically - you can then simply log in, and try to start X manually using the "startx" command. That way, you can work to tune your X settings easier.

You can also try to use the nvidia-xconfig utility like this:

$ nvidia-xconfig -s -c dummy_file -o xorg.conf
That will try to find dummy_file as being your current xorg.conf, will fail to find it, issue an error (don't worry about it), and then carry on to create a completely new configuration file with the nvidia driver in the file xorg.conf in your current directory. You can then edit the generated file to make sure the monitor frequencies and other settings sound sane, backup your /etc/X11/xorg.conf, and replace it with this one.

Hope this helps.

[red]

Uh I thought Linus Torvalds invented Linux?
Linus Torvalds did start the Linux project, but Linux is only the kernel. The kernel makes everything work (takes all the different devices from different vendors that a computer might consist of and provides a unified software interface for the system's applications, so that you can simply write programs that say "read 1 megabyte from that file" and not have to worry that a USB drive is different than a CDROM or hard drive). But the kernel is only one component of many that makes your system useful to you. You can't browse the Internet or read mail or listen to music with only the kernel.

The GNU project that Richard Stallman started began earlier than Linux, and Stallman and his collaborators already had editors (the famous Emacs), compilers (the GCC suite) and many other application, but lacked a kernel. They just used Linux as a kernel for practical reasons, thinking they would eventually write a better one and replace it (project GNU Hurd). But it just stuck, became popular, and eventually overtook the name of the whole project.

More details here (link) (http://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#why).

[guitartango]

Sorry to burst your bubble but there are more Vulnerabilities in the Linux Kernel than Windows 7.

[marnold]

Sorry to burst your bubble but there are more Vulnerabilities in the Linux Kernel than Windows 7.
Where did you get the source code for Windows 7?

[guitartango]

Where did you get the source code for Windows 7?

Its a fact i am afraid. Look at all the security websites.

[red]

Sorry to burst your bubble but there are more Vulnerabilities in the Linux Kernel than Windows 7.
Is that your professional opinion? :applause

[guitartango]

Is that your professional opinion? :applause

Yes it is and no ! I love Linux, been using RH since it it first appeared on a computer magazine. Installed every distro you can think of, Debian, RH, Slackware, Suse, Solaris, Open Solaris, BSD........ and so on. Given a choice between Apache and IIS then the penguin wins, given a choice between Corporate email and just Email then Exchange wins.
Want to process millions of email then Postfix, qmail and sendmail wins. Just because no one has attacked Linux yet doesn't mean its not secure. Surely as a Network Admin you know the dangers of cutting edge Kernels !!!!!!!.

Just a note: I manage both Windows 2008 and Slackware servers with a little BSD thrown in.

[red]

Installed every distro you can think of, Debian, RH, Slackware, Suse, Solaris, Open Solaris, BSD........ and so on.

I can think of many UNIX OSes, so don't bet on it;
simply installing many OSes does not prove particular competence, it just shows that one has a lot of free time. That's like saying someone who has owned all the guitar models in the world is a better guitarist than someone who only played a couple. Simply not how it works.


Just because no one has attacked Linux yet doesn't mean its not secure.
Plenty of people have attacked Linux, some with success. Any software system complex enough will have bugs and vulnerabilities, it's just that Linux being open source, billions of eyes read the source code, and bugs get found out earlier, and fixed earlier. Then they just get patched.


Surely as a Network Admin you know the dangers of cutting edge Kernels !!!!!!!.
Not sure that was a compliment, but I'm not a network administrator. I have however been writing C/C++ code professionally for over a decade, most of it for UNIX systems, but for Windows systems too. That's really not at all why I'm on this forum though.

We're really off-topic, and I can see nothing good coming out of this discussion. If you think the Windows 7 kernel is safer than Linux, be my guest and use it. If you think the discussion is worth having, try posting on a dedicated forum, methinks we're wasting forum database space on a dispute that's frankly neither important nor interesting.

And I suggest that if you do open a separate thread you actually point out a couple of "all those security sites" with independent research on the number and severity of Linux vs. Windows 7 kernel bugs.

[guitartango]

I can think of many UNIX OSes, so don't bet on it;

So can I (what are you trying to say)

simply installing many OSes does not prove particular competence,

Doesn't it. Spent years on the command line, set up many email servers and web servers




Plenty of people have attacked Linux, some with success. Any software system complex enough will have bugs and vulnerabilities, it's just that Linux being open source, billions of eyes read the source code, and bugs get found out earlier, and fixed earlier. Then they just get patched.

I have to agree with this one :applause


Not sure that was a compliment, but I'm not a network administrator. I have however been writing C/C++ code professionally for over a decade, most of it for UNIX systems, but for Windows systems too. That's really not at all why I'm on this forum though.

Didn't say you were a NA, but i have many many coders who know nothing about security as long as their code works.

We're really off-topic, and I can see nothing good coming out of this discussion. If you think the Windows 7 kernel is safer than Linux, be my guest and use it. If you think the discussion is worth having, try posting on a dedicated forum, methinks we're wasting forum database space on a dispute that's frankly neither important nor interesting.

What dispute..... typical Linux user only.... My OS is better than yours.

And I suggest that if you do open a separate thread you actually point out a couple of "all those security sites" with independent research on the number and severity of Linux vs. Windows 7 kernel bugs.

Windows suffered fewer security vulnerabilities than Linux last year, according to figures released by vulnerability tracker SecurityFocus.

Need i say more.. .....

[marnold]

Windows suffered fewer security vulnerabilities than Linux last year, according to figures released by vulnerability tracker SecurityFocus.

Need i say more.. .....
Give me a break. As soon as Microsoft releases their source code so that Security Focus or others can give a thorough look-over, I'll buy this argument as relevant. Security through obscurity is no security at all. Even beyond that, the big issue with vulnerabilities (and every OS has them) is a) severity and b) time between discovery and a patch that works.

I'm ending my participation in this thread right now because I feel like I'm being baited.

[guitartango]

Marnold

I agree with what you say and i am not on this forum to stir up any trouble or spend 100's of post's debating WINDOZE V THE PENGUIN.

Although my Fender Strat is better than a Gibson :what

[red]

Spent years on the command line, set up many email servers and web servers.
And yet you don't seem to be able to properly use a simple QUOTE tag when you reply on a forum.

Windows suffered fewer security vulnerabilities than Linux last year, according to figures released by vulnerability tracker SecurityFocus.

Need i say more.. .....
Yes, you should provide an exact link to enlighten us. It's hard to dispute general statements from self-proclaimed experts.

Consider this my last reply to you.

[guitartango]

And yet you don't seem to be able to properly use a simple QUOTE tag when you reply on a forum.

Yes, you should provide an exact link to enlighten us. It's hard to dispute general statements from self-proclaimed experts.

Consider this my last reply to you.

Not being funny but as soon as you criticise Linux you get this sort of petty comments
"And yet you don't seem to be able to properly"
"Yes, you should provide an exact link to enlighten us"

The trouble is that Linux users don't seem to want to except this and they start throwing tantrums..... read the security forums.

As for me i am still running a new version of unbuntu and Windows 7. I like all OS's but none are perfect.