is ubuntu free ?

I have xp. In the event of the end of support, what about Ubuntu. Why
not ? I saw where it was very light and would fit on a blank cd. I have been using MSE,SAS, and Malwarebytes . What free antivirus would be used with?
I am looking for FREE options.

 

Hey shadetree, yea Ubuntu is very free, I run it on an old XP machine without an antivirus, but I going to lwt you look at these 2 links to try and help you out.

http://www.ubuntu.com/

This link shows you your antivirus choices if you decide to choose an antivirus.

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Antivirus

You can also test drive Ubuntu by running it inside Windows just like any other program, and if you don't like it just go to Add/Remove and uninstall it. See Here. http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/install-ubuntu-with-windows

 

IMO, you're wise to be doing this NOW, instead of waiting to see what "bad things" might happen at the end of XP support. To answer your question succinctly, yes, Ubuntu is free...completely free, as in "free of charge" as well as "freedom of choice." I've been running Ubuntu since 2009; I've since converted nearly every machine in my house to Ubuntu. I LOVE Ubuntu and I think it's awesome! However, with that said, Ubuntu isn't for everyone, and Ubuntu isn't for every computer. More on that later. With respect to anti-virus for Linux distros...forget about it! You wont need it, as Linux is immune to viruses, which are targeted at Windows systems. Even if you receive a virus/malware, AND purposefully grant permission for the installation (Linux/Ubuntu won't install ANYTHING unless you specifically authorize it do so...NO BACKGROUND STEALTH INSTALLATIONS!), your system will not be affected, as the Linux filesystem is vastly different from the Windows filesystem. If you simply MUST have an anti-virus, ClamAV is available for free. I installed it on my system in an effort to be a conscientious user, so that I wouldn't be a "carrier" who accidentally forwards or sends an infected file to a Windows user. In 4 years, I've only caught 1 or 2 instances of malware that I received from others, but it had no effect on my system whatsoever; and I was able to notify the sender for them to scan their own system. Bottom line, AV isn't necessary, but free options are available if you simply must have it.

In a similar manner, nearly ALL linux programs are free and are easily installed from a master "Software Center", very much like an Apple Store or Google Play. There are "paid apps" if you absolutely must have something in particular, but in the past 4 years I haven't needed anything that I couldn't find for free in the Software Center. Alternative Browsers, e-mail clients, video players, music players, scanning software, Skype, remote adminstration software...ALL available and ALL free!

With software concerns addressed, let's talk about potential hardware issues with specific machines. What machine are you looking to install Ubuntu on? Do you know your processor speed? RAM? Graphics card/GPU? Depending on your answers, Ubuntu may run amazingly fast on your machine...OR it could be somewhat sluggish. As far as Linux desktops go, Ubuntu is one of the "heavier" distributions in terms of system requirements. But even if your machine is a lower-spec machine, there are MANY Ubuntu-derivatives that are even lighter. Bottom line, there's a Linux distro for everyone; but since you started out asking about Ubuntu, let's start with that and then work in some alternatives for your consideration?!

You mentioned fitting on a cd. What you're describing is a LiveCD, which allows you to "test" Ubuntu on your machine without making ANY permanent changes whatsoever. If everything works as anticipated, you can play with the system until you have formed an opinion. If you like it and want to keep it, you can install directly from the CD, or you can move on to another selection.

I'm guessing your WinXP machine is 32-bit, as most WinXP machines are. IMO, you should stick with the 32-bit version of 12.04 LTS as 32-bit is universally compatible with 32 & 64 bit machines, and the 12.04 LTS version is a "long term support" release, with 5 years of security patches/updates. You can try 13.10, as that's the latest & greatest, but it will only be supported for 9 months after October 2013 (hence the version 2013 (13), October (10), or 13.10). Ubuntu releases a new version every 6 months; and every 2 years, a new LTS version is released, with the next release due in April 2014, or version 14.04. Here's a link to download Ubuntu:
http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop

After downloading the version of interest, you'll need to burn the downloaded image to a LiveCD. Here's a link to create a LiveCD for Ubuntu:
http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/burn-a-dvd-on-windows

And finally, instructions on how to boot from a LiveCD in order to "test" on your system:
http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/install-desktop-long-term-support

If all goes well, you should be able to boot into a "LiveSession" of Ubuntu, in order to "Try Ubuntu" before you install Ubuntu. Try to remember you're running from a CD, so the system MAY be a little slow and sluggish, compared to what you're used to. If it runs okay from the CD, I promise you it will simply FLY upon permanent installation! That's really all there is to it! Play with the LiveSession as much as you want, until you're comfortable making a final decision for a permanent installation.

In the event you don't like Ubuntu, or your hardware specs are marginal for the Ubuntu OS, I mentioned some alternatives that were "lighter" and would run faster. IMO, the best Ubuntu-derivative systems are LXLE and Zorin. Inasmuch as they're both Ubuntu-based, the above instuctions still apply, but substitute the alternative download ISO file of choice for the alternative LiveCD versions of LXLE and/or Zorin.

I have LXLE on an Atom-powered notebook that had OEM Win7 when I bought it. I have been VERY HAPPY with LXLE, as LXLE is faster on that machine than Win7 EVER was! Here's a link to check out LXLE:
http://lxle.net/

As before, stick with 32-bit. No worries about LTS, as LXLE only uses LTS versions as a base. A caveat of LXLE is that the ISO file size is approximately 1.3GB and, therefore, too big for a CD. A LiveCD of LXLE must be burned on a DVD. If you don't have the ability to burn or read DVDs on your WinXP machine, this distro isn't a good option for you!

Another lightweight alternative is Zorin Lite. I recently installed Zorin Lite on a Dell Mini10 that had OEM WinXP installed. Once again, Zorin Lite runs faster than the original OEM WinXP installation. Zorin was put on this particular machine because the user specifically wanted something that looked as much like WinXP as possible. After looking at screenshots of Zorin, the user thought Zorin was a "dead ringer" for WinXP, and I've had no complaints from them since installation...only "thank you"s! Here's a link for Zorin:
http://zorin-os.com/free6.html

Once again, stick with 32-bit. Again, I would recommend version 6 (it's actually version 6.4) as that is based on LTS. From there, choose Core or Lite. Again, the Core ISO hovers around 1.5GB, so the same issues apply that were previously discussed in LXLE. I typically suggest the Lite version, as the Lite ISO will fit on a CD and it's also a lighter-weight/faster-running distro. Since they look nearly identical in appearance, might as well go for the faster version!

That should get you started! A lot of information here, but try not to get overwhelmed. If you're feeling overwhelmed, let me summarize simply by stating:
1. download distro of choice (Ubuntu/LXLE/Zorin Lite)
2. burn LiveCD
3. boot from LiveCD to "TRY" distro
4. play with distro until decision is made
5. try next distro, OR "Install" from LiveCD

It really is that simple! If you're in the right frame of mind, this will actually be fun for you! (or maybe I'm just a little demented?!) Let us know what you decided and how you made out!

Good luck!

 

The only cost that Ubuntu presents is Learning & Investigating Time. I recommend detailing which software packages you need to use - the services that you would never want to 'do without' and create that list, then start looking for Linux alternatives.

The next plateau will be software you like to use, but perhaps you'd have alternatives in the past so you've discerned 'good' and 'bad' points for this class of software service to you.

The next issue will be, "How much cooperation will I require with Windows Files in the future?" Do you have external hard-drives? Then you'll need to investigate and learn how to use those File Formats with a Linux box. (If you use CDs, DVDs or BluRays for data-file backups, then you'll be relatively safe to 'read' those disks under Linux, Mac, whatever.)

If you will have a Windows PC around this future Linux box, then you'll want to investigate SAMBA, which is an interface between NTFS hard-drives and Linux.

You may also learn about WINE, which is a Linux 'interpreter' or shell that can be installed and it has good - not perfect! - success running some Windows software on a Linux box.

 

Will take a while to survey the links. Thanks for replys! One more question. Ubuntu will fit in my 4 GB partition ?

 

Simple answer... yes

 

I'm going to say no. If it does, it's an extremely tight squeeze and the OS may not be able to install properly. IMO, you need at LEAST 8GB; more if you're going to want to store data, files, etc...

If you haven't already created a partition, don't bother. The LiveCD will create a partition for you once you select "Install Ubuntu". Ubuntu will detect your partition(s) and any OS already on them. All you have to do is decide whether to "install alongside existing OS" in dual-boot configuration, choosing between them at startup; or "erase existing partition and install Ubuntu in its place" using entire disk; or "something else" and manually partition disk. New users should choose "install alongside" or "use entire partition".

If you've already created a 4GB partition, you should either enlarge it to 8GB+ (I'd suggest 20-25GB, if possible; more is better) or delete the partition and let the LiveCD do whatever it recommends to you. You'll be pretty amazed at how easy the Ubuntu installer is!

 

I'd recommend finding another hard-drive and using that, saving your Win disk as-is. If you have a 100Gb or 160Gb or even 80Gb, use that for a while. See what you think. A good, quick test-case. Hedon's comments about the Installer being easy and straight-forward is my opinion, too.

 

Properties list C: as 32.5 gig and Dpartition I use to store files) as about
4.8 gigs. C has 26 gigs free space. One reason I thought of switching,was that when doing recent reinstall I hit a few snags. If you only have a xp disc, there is a lot of stuff to do in a proper sequence. Done it a few times before without much problem. This last time was kind of rough. I did find a scratch on
the install CD. So maybe something wasn't installed right. The first problem was getting from IE6 to IE8. I did have service paks saved, but not much else. I found where a lot of people were having problem updating xp from fresh installs recently. Had to apply a couple of Microsoft fix-it apps. Also was having trouble with svchost.exe using up cpu. That was making everything really slow. The svchost.exe problem was what prompted the reinstall. After the reinstall the problem was still there. About 2 months before, back around end of November had a problem with cpu fan. Replaced that and then soon after that was when the svchost.exe thing started.

 

Citing the article you referenced:
According to Wikipedia, a virus is a computer program that can copy itself and infect a computer. That's a pretty broad description. Most people would consider a more specific definition.

By MY definition, Linux is immune. But, in all fairness, not everyone defines it the same. And I'd have to pretty much agree with everything that article states, so I'm glad you put it out there. I don't want to mislead anyone, or speak untruths, as perceived by the majority, so I appreciate the clarification.

How about I modify my innocently-made previous statement, to clarify that Linux is immune to WINDOWS viruses (although Linux can be a carrier/transmitter); and while there are theoretical Linux viruses "in the wild", you have to purposefully make the choice to install them.

You are correct, though, in that nothing is 100% fool-proof. Fair enough! Have you heard the saying "Show me something that is fool-proof, and I'll show you a 'new & improved' fool!"

I saw the front page post! Thank you! I'm just glad that someone found my advice/suggestions to be helpful; for someone to broadcast it feels like an honor; I can only hope that others who are considering WinXP migrations find it to be useful in some way! Thanks for putting it in a more prominent place.

 

Are you thinking of dual-booting? Based on what you disclosed, I'd allocate 10GB Win/20GB Linux or even do a 50/50 split. Using myself as a reference, I have a 1TB drive and 100's of GB of data, files, media, etc... Sometimes I forget that I'm not a typical user. You'll be fine with a 10GB-15GB partition.

Conversely, have you thought of a Linux installation on whole disk, and creating a WinXP virtual machine (VM) with VirtualBox? You can create a "dynamic" disk size in VirtualBox, reserving a specified maximum disk area, but only using what is needed. Food for thought. Again, boils down to preferences.

Referencing your WinXP installation/update issues, I recently converted one of my machines to Ubuntu Studio (a recording computer) and created a WinXP VM on that machine. Although I had NEVER had issues with WinXP VMs previously, I ran into the very same issues you described! To make a long story short, this was a MS issue, and I suspect it will only get worse as April 2014 gets nearer. It seems MS is already tapering off WinXP support to encourage WinXP users to NOT wait until the last minute.

Sounds like you identified the solution regarding IE6 upgrade to IE8, which thereby allowed the update to proceed with over 100+ patches/updates/etc... I let it run overnight and I'll bet the whole process took around 12-14 hours after IE8 was installed. PITA!! But it has been fine since then...at least until April 2014, right?!

 

OK Hedon, I am going to get on and do some learning on that Virtual Box thing. I will maybe use Ubuntu for internet. Then keep xp around for some
windows based programs. Thnx !!

 

You still haven't provided your machine specs. Make & Model at least? Your hardware may make the decision for you?! http://forums.majorgeeks.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

OS Name Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
Version 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 Build 2600
OS Manufacturer Microsoft Corporation
System Name GARY-POZRUC5YTI
System Manufacturer VIA Technologies, Inc.
System Model PM800-8237
System Type X86-based PC
Processor x86 Family 15 Model 3 Stepping 4 GenuineIntel ~2394 Mhz
BIOS Version/Date Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00 PG, 4/19/2004
SMBIOS Version 2.3
Windows Directory C:\WINDOWS
System Directory C:\WINDOWS\system32
Boot Device \Device\HarddiskVolume1
Locale United States
Hardware Abstraction Layer Version = "5.1.2600.5512 (xpsp.080413-2111)"
User Name GARY-POZRUC5YTI\gary
Time Zone Central Standard Time
Total Physical Memory 512.00 MB
Available Physical Memory 48.21 MB
Total Virtual Memory 2.00 GB
Available Virtual Memory 1.96 GB
Page File Space 1.03 GB
Page File C:\pagefile.sys


Let's see if if i got this right. Using the the Virtual Box is an option opposed to having the 2nd OS in a partition ? I saw where sometimes might have to hide one OS from the other.
Did some reading on virtual box. Was stumped on the memory allocation. Does this setup limit ram usage for each system ?

 

Thank you Shade, but you might want to sanitize that list to remove any personal info (Gary). I'm sure all the MG members are good people, but you never know what non-members might be able to do with very little personal information and a whole lot of research and hacking?!

I'm not clear on who your manufacturer and model might be? I was looking for something like "Dell Latitude D505", so I could check out various components, options, successful installations, and/or post-installation workarounds. I've never heard of "VIA". This is all I could find on the VIA website for their chipsets:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linux
Q: Where can I get a driver for my VIA audio solution for Linux operating systems?
A: The ALSA Driver Version 1.0.25 supports the following VIA audio solutions: VT1702S / VT1705 / VT1708B/VT1708BCE/VT1708S/VT1716S/VT1718S/VT1802P/VT1812/VT1818S/ VT1828S/VT2002P/VT2020/VT2021.

It has been tested with the following Linux operating systems: Ubuntu 9.04, Ubuntu 8.10, Ubuntu 8.04, Fedora Core 8, SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10, SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 11, Ubuntu 10.10, Ubuntu 11.04.

Q: Where can I obtain VIA support packages for Linux operating systems?
A: All packages including legacy versions can be found at the VIA Driver portal. The latest packages and news about support can also be found at the VIA Linux Portal.

Q: I have downloaded a VIA Linux support package and I cannot decompress it or it seems to be corrupted.
A: Please use "tar -xvjf" instead of "tar -xvzf" to extract the compressed file.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, the good news is that VIA has heard of Linux and appears to have been supported in the Linux kernel since 2009. There's a VERY GOOD chance that support continues for hardware of that era, but proceed with caution. THOROUGHLY "try linux" before you install!

More good news is that your processor runs at 2.4MhZ, which is plenty fast for Linux, and your 512MB RAM is a little on the light side, but is certainly enough to run the LXLE and Zorin Lite distros previously discussed. I would not recommend Ubuntu, as your RAM simply isn't enough to provide a good experience; you will most likely be unimpressed and/or frustrated by the system lag. If you MUST have Ubuntu (rather than LXLE or Zorin), you should probably bump the RAM to a minimum of 1GB, although 2GB would be ideal.

Also, your RAM issues likely preclude you as a "satisfied" VirtualBox user. 512MB is simply not enough to allocate to a "host" and a "guest" machine. If you're in a position to bump the RAM, again 1GB is a min, but 2GB is ideal.

If you cannot bump RAM, and you have found a satisfactory LiveCD for a permananent installation, I would recommend that you dual-boot your system (install linux side-by-side with Windows) and limit your choices to LXLE or Zorin Lite. Alternatively, IF you can bump your system to 1GB RAM, you can add Ubuntu to the list for dual-booting options; OR you can switch to a 100% Linux installation of LXLE or Zorin Lite and install WinXP as a VirtualBox VM from inside the Linux OS, allocating more than 50% of memory for the Linux host (such as 640MB RAM Linux host; 384MB RAM WinXP VM). Finally, IF you can bump your system to 2GB RAM, you can install whatever Linux distro you want with WinXP as a VM, OR you can dual-boot with both systems...no limits on your options! ;-)

As someone who has navigated these waters before, I would recommend you do NOTHING to your hardware at this time...save your coin! Stick with LXLE or Zorin Lite when trying LiveCDs and try REAL HARD to like one of them! When you're satisfied that your choice works with all your hardware and connected peripherals (if it doesn't you MAY be stuck with WinXP only!) , I'd install your choice in a dual-boot fashion and use it in real-life situations.

1 of 2 things will happen. You'll either decide that Linux is so awesome that you want it as your primary and main OS, with WinXP as a VM for the occassional need for a specific windows program, and you'll bump your RAM to 1-2GB, and reinstall Linux as the primary OS, wiping out what is currently on the disk, and installing WinXP as a VirtualBox VM; OR, you'll decide the dual-boot situation suits you just fine! Either way is a win for you, IMO, but that's just my opinion!

They key to this whole situation is your hardware, which is something I've never heard of and is somewhat rare in the Linux forums. It just means you have to be extra diligent in the testing phase of the LiveCD...try EVERYTHING you can think of before you install a problematic system. Not trying to scare you, or discourage you, as it truly is a risk-free process on your part if you follow procedure. Just trying to sufficiently inform you so that you can make the best decision for YOU! Good luck!

 

Can't remember the easy right way to post system specs. (dementia). Anyway, it is an e-machine. Don't know what else has been left out.
Be back in a few days.

 

Download Speccy:
http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/speccy.html

 

I know it is not recommended, however I will ask anyway. What about
skipping the live CD burning and installing the Linux direct to a logical partition ? (empty partition). Also I found reference to making a buffer partition between the 2 OS's. And about the boot loader, are there options or
choice you have to make ?
Not sure I understood correctly about trying Ubuntu by installing within Windows. Do u have to burn the Live Cd to do that ?

 

I haven't done ANY of these, so I can neither confirm nor deny their viability. Obviously, providing pros & cons is out of the question for me. Perhaps someone with those experiences will chime in and offer advice?

The one thing I CAN comment on, a little bit, is the installation from within Windows. This is called WUBI, and you install Ubuntu from within Windows just like any other program with an installation CD and *.exe files. Perhaps the downloaded ISO can be "read" by an appropriate program that locates the *.exe installation file, but again, I don't know. I have seen tech advisories from Ubuntu discouraging users from WUBI installations, but I don't know if that was a WUBU-related issues or if that had more to do with Windows 8 machines and/or UEFI hardware. Regardless, I'd still be cautious.

You've got to do what works for you, using a skillset you possess and are comfortable with. The LiveCD methodology is tried, true, and actually pretty simple. What are you trying to do that causes you concern using the LiveCD methodology?

If this is an issue regarding your preferred choice of distro not fitting on a CD, and you don't have a DVD reader/writer, I can point you in the direction of a LiveUSB stick. Furthermore, if your machine doesn't boot from USB, we can use something called PLOP to provide USB boot capabilities on machines that lack that ability. I haven't mentioned either of these previously because I was keeping things as simple as possible, which works for about 98% of users. If you're in the 2%, we can go there...

 

Possibly might try the boot from usb. How to check to see if computer
will boot from usb ? Bios options, right ? If so how many MB's or GB's would the pen drive need ? I have one of those but I dont know what size it is off hand. Has some stuff on it. Dont know if If that would work. Can pen drives be erased ? Lot of ???

Any help appreciated!

 

Yes, check from BIOS. Alternatively, during computer boot up, there is a brief moment at the very beginning of boot where a message displays at the bottom of the screen to the effect of "Boot Options = F12" or some other Fn key (usually F12 though, depending on manufacturer). Pressing F12 will allow you to change the boot order for this particular boot sequence without making a permanent change. If USB is in the list, you should be able to boot from USB; if it is not, you will need to go the PLoP route, burn a PLoP LiveCD, and boot from CD.

I have created LiveUSB sticks of 1GB (for CD-sized ISO files), but if you're thinking USB stick because a distro is too big for a CD, you will need a 2GB stick, which are kinda hard to find one. Seems like 4GB is the smallest stick you can find in stores today?!

A stick should be formatted in FAT. Most come pre-formatted now; if it does not, Plodr's advice is good. She is a Windows and Linux user who has done this a LOT!!! Also, other than formatted, the stick should be blank. No other data or files on it...

At this point, you can create a LiveUSB stick with the distro of your choice:
http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/create-a-usb-stick-on-windows

Remember to "try Linux" thoroughly before you install it! Enjoy!

P.S. If you cannot boot from USB, let us know, and we'll show you how to burn a PLoP CD, which WILL allow you to boot from USB.

 

So formatting will erase whats on the stick. Properties lists as 1.86 GB. So I guess that is 2GB.
Bios has several options for boot device. They are

HDD-0
SCSI
CD ROM
HDD-1
HDD-2
HDD-3
ZIP 100
USB-FDD
USB-ZIP
USB-CD ROM
USB- HDD
LAN
LS 120
Floppy
Disable

Well, I have the answer for the bios option being (USB-HDD).

 

Correct. Formatting will erase the stick, and your stick is 2GB. You are good to go.

Correct again. Looks like you can boot from USB. However, don't change the BIOS. Any change to the BIOS will affect all future boot ups, and you don't want that. Use the F12 trick to just change the current boot sequence this one time, in a non-permanent fashion. You want your device to revert to a HDD boot the next time you start it.

 

Have LXLE running from usb stick. Is super slow. Maybe some driver issues along with the fact that its on a 2G stick. Too slow maybe to download anything from there(drivers). Any ideas ? i could use another stik of ram, but dont have that option right now.

 

First of all, CONGRATS! You've been soaking up all this information and busting your hump to figure all this out, so this is a breakthrough moment. Bottoms up!

I'm a little concerned LXLE is "super slow" on your machine. LXLE has a reputation for being very smooth and responsive and HDD>USB>CD, so "slower than I'm used to" was kinda expected, but "super slow" is a bit of a suprise. Installing to HDD would certainly be faster, but you won't know how much faster until you do it. And if its faster, but still not fast enough, you're either stuck with that or you go through gyrations to undo it and try something else. I suspect the bus speed of your USB ports (almost certainly 2.0) or RAM sticks are extreme bottlenecks on your system. If we knew that for certain, we could probably predict how much faster a HDD would be. In the absence of that...

Some things to try:
- try Zorin Lite on USB; if Zorin is faster, the problem is LXLE; if Zorin is NOT faster, we can rule out differences in distros and focus on your hardware
- shut down the system, install additional RAM, and re-boot from USB with preferred distro; if it's faster, RAM is the issue

It is POSSIBLE the default graphic driver (which is generic) is draining your system resources, slowing down everything. I'd tell you how to check for alternative drivers, but even if one is available the system will need to be re-booted to activate it, bringing you right back to the "super slow" LiveUSB environment. For now, let's focus on isolating/eliminating "distro issues" and/or "RAM issues".

As a frame of reference for speed, we're just hoping to achieve "I can live with that" speed, knowing that a HDD install will be even faster. Anything less than that speed is a roll of the dice for an acceptable speed after full installation.

Anyone else ever had a problem with a "super slow" distro running as a Live Environment from a USB stick? Plodr?

 

Did some quick checking on the LXLE forums and I note the minimum requirements to run LXLE is 512MB RAM, which is exactly what you're running. However, a LiveUSB is run entirely from RAM, so I suspect your RAM is the problem, as there is no "operational head room"...all RAM is being used to store the LiveEnvironment that you see running.

Do you have a stick of RAM laying around you can install in this machine, even if it's only temporary to test this theory? Even as little as 256K may be enough, although another 512K would be perfect. I really think RAM is the issue causing "super slow".

 

As far as the ram I can check whats in a old tower that i have. Likely not the right kind though. I will give it a look.

 

Be careful not to "force" the wrong RAM. I'm having a devil of a time with your non-popular machine & chipset. Is it a laptop? Desktop? Just a motherboard in something you built?

I've used various combinations of EMachines, Via Technologies, and/or ECS PM800-8237 as a search criteria and still cannot locate a spec page for your machine, to identify the proper RAM. The best I can do is a generic search of ECS motherboards, revealing one of the following from the Crucial RAM site:

PM800-A2
http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=PM800-A2&Cat=RAM
PM800-M2
http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=PM800-M2&Cat=RAM

A generic search of PM800 yields:
http://www.crucial.com/search/searchresults.aspx?keywords=pm800

So it looks like your system requires DDR PC2700 or PC3200. Here's the problem though...RAM should be "matched" when run in pairs. You really need to identify what is already in your machine, the 2700 or 3200, and match that. 512MB vs. 1GB isn't important, but the speed of 2700 vs 3200 is VERY important. According to posts in some forums, your motherboard is (or perhaps WAS?) prone to RAM "sync" issues at one time. A BIOS upgrade may have fixed it, but with only PM800-8237 to go by, I just can't tell. You should run your computer Make, Model, etc... through the Crucial site and find out what your OPTIONS are. Then verify what is inside your machine, and make sure you MATCH it. If you have the proper RAM laying around, great. If not, it looks like $15 will solve your problem.

However, with all that said, I'd still move on to test the Zorin Lite distro. LXLE is a 1.3GB Live distro running entirely within 512MB RAM; Zorin Lite is a 680MB Live distro to run on 512MB RAM. LXLE is nearly 3x larger than the RAM you are running, requiring a lot of "read/write" swapping with every click of your mouse; Zorin Lite is just slightly more than 1x larger than your RAM, which may allow more operational headroom. If Zorin Lite runs "acceptable", then RAM is your issue. You'll need to do this anyhow in order to decide which interface you prefer. If we're lucky, it runs better AND you like it better!

Here's the good news though...512MB is enough to run either of these distros once installed. I'm GUESSING the RAM is low for a Live Environment, unless someone chimes in with better direction. I'm reluctant to tell you to purchase RAM to simply "test" some distros. If you're inclined to do that anyhow, as more RAM is always better than less, go right ahead...but I'm not going to say you need to. Now that you know how to successfully create a LiveUSB stick, I'm going to say "let's test an environment with a lighter ISO size." FWIW...

 

I think I am finding that LXLE just is not a good host for my VIA display and or VIA Rhine Ethernet Adapter. Probably have to go to earlier release of something. Have not found a way to identify the problem. So far seems like it moves around pretty good til I get on internet.

 

That's a good clue! Based on what you describe, I'd lean less toward a display issue and more toward the ethernet adapter. FWIW, I remember seeing some posts regarding VIA ethernet when googling other info for you. Seems like these issues have been around since circa 2009, so an older version is not likely to resolve the problem.

I think I remember seeing some posts about full vs half-duplex and speed performance. Linux has a via-rhine driver, but it seems like the VIA cards need to run at half-duplex (10 or 100MBS) versus full-duplex, which appears to be the default. Starting to get a little above my level of understanding, but I found this:

http://linux.windows8az.com/1147740...ctioning-via-technologies-inc-vt6102-rhine-ii

About 3/4 down the page is this:

So based on this, locate the terminal in LXLE (accessories menu, or simultaneously press 'ctrl-alt-T') and type:

Code:

sudo ethtool -s eth0 speed 10 duplex half

press enter, then type:

Code:

sudo dhclient eth0

(in both instances, note that eth0 is the number "0" and not the letter "o"!) This may improve your internet speed, thereby improving your desktop experience. If this helps, this issue can be resolved within a permanent installation, but the Live Environment will reset to the default configuration every time you re-boot the LiveUSB stick. So continue to experiment and tinker, but be aware you'll need to re-type this command every time you re-boot the stick.

THIS is exactly why you test your hardware before installation! It isn't necessarily a deal-killer for a linux installation, especially if a workaround or tweak is available, but you want to know these issues BEFORE you install them.

I'm still suggesting you try Zorin Lite, for comparison. They're both based on Ubuntu 12.04, so they'll both likely behave the same way, with the same driver module; although it's possible that the Zorin developer has configured that driver file differently! But for a simple 5-15 minute investment, let's KNOW it for certain. We'll easily spend that much time googling the permanent solution and then implementing it.

 

This VIA chipset of yours is problematic. I'm finding all kinds of issues regarding internet connectivity and/or speed of VIA ethernet NIC. Some are resolved, some gave up.

Is this a DESKTOP computer or a LAPTOP? You never answered this question.

If a LAPTOP, is there built-in wireless? If not, do you have a wireless card or USB stick to test? If a DESKTOP, do you have a spare NIC card, or wireless USB stick?

Sometimes, the best solution to a Linux problem is better/different hardware. While some folks are resolving their VIA-Rhone driver issues by changing configs, this is a catch-22 for you, testing a Live Desktop environment, as any changes you make may require a re-boot, which do not persist in a Live Environment. Furthermore, you have very little Linux experience and while I have more, I haven't experienced this type of issue before, so I'm leary of my ability to provide solid advice. I often learn things by trial and error and that's okay with me. I'm afraid my trial & error methodology will frustrate you and turn you away from Linux. And that would be unfortunate, as your HARDWARE is the issue here, not the software.

IMO, the path of least resistance is a hardware change, especially for a new user of linux who just wants to "test" things. You shouldn't have to go through these gymnastics to simply try it out. If you were having these issues with an already-installed Linux system, I'd have a different answer, as we could make changes, save them, and re-boot with the changes in place to test the solution. This just isn't possible with a Live USB stick and a new user...it's a circular Catch-22.

It appears to me your existing hardware doesn't have good linux drivers. This won't change, as its an older low-spec chipset, and support will only decrease over time. If you still want to use this machine (everything else appears okay!) you really should consider a different NIC. If you're willing and still want to, let's try booting the LiveUSB with a wifi USB stick in place and see if that solves the issue. If you don't have one handy, I highly recommend the Bolse sticks, as they work on Windows, Mac, AND Linux machines. I have this stick on 2 devices and they work wonderfully.

http://www.amazon.com/Bolse®-300Mbps-Wireless-N-Micro-Adapter/dp/B00DTZYHX4

Alternatively, if your device is a desktop and you prefer an ethernet NIC, here's a value-priced card that 2 linux users, using 2 different distros, reviewed as "worked out of the box":

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...04011&ef_id=UrmNIQAAALYk4WCv:20140124170808:s

Provided you have a USB port to dedicate, an even better priced unit, and solution for either desktop or laptop might be this:
http://www.amazon.com/JacobsParts®-Ethernet-Network-Adapter-Windows/dp/B00AJV7IA0

All of the above were represented to work with Linux, i.e. have driver support built-in to Linux kernel. Forum posters suggest that Intel-based NIC are the safest best. Here's another device, slightly higher-priced, that is represented to work with Linux:
http://www.amazon.com/Intel-PWLA8391GT-1000-Network-Adapter/dp/B00030DEQE

Any of these suggestions are a lower-cost solution than a new machine, or upgrading WinXP to something else. Other than the ethernet, all of your other hardware looks okay...I'm not aware of any other "blacklist" hardware on your machine. It maybe isn't the "painless" way to upgrade/convert that you were hoping for, but it's still the lowest cost longer-term solution, IMO. But it's your call...either way, let me know.

 

Currently doing this from Xubuntu 12.04. It hangs a little but not as bad as LXLE. Tried a site that needed newer version of Firefox or Flash (Pandora). I tried to update Flash but maybe cant do that in Live cd mode ?

 

Wow, I'm surprised, as an ethernet connection shouldn't vary between distros. It's one of those "under the hood" programs. But this is why you solicit different opinions to figure out what you want to do. I'm glad Plodr chimed, and I'm glad you followed up on her suggestion!

Do you like Xubuntu? Is it responsive enough? Keep in mind that it WILL be faster when installed to hard drive! If you don't like Xubuntu, tell us what you don't like and perhaps we can suggest an alternative distro that uses the XFCE desktop environment and addresses your preferences.

 

I think there was another browser option besides firefox. I will try that and the you tube thing. Main dislike is resolution options on this version of Xubuntu. I can't do the small print. I tried installing the extra software pkg. that was supposed to include java and flash, but it was taking really long and I just gave up on it.

 

I believe your comments on RAM are incorrect. PC2700 and PC3200 can be mixed it a recognized RAM manufacturer, such as Crucial, says either choice will work in a system. If the two speeds are mixed, then the computer will run all RAM as the speed of the slower RAM. Where precise matching of pairs does come into play is with motherboards that feature dual-channel capability. In that case, RAM must be installed in identical pairs to function in dual-channel mode, which provides slightly better performance compared to non-dual-channel systems, or dual-channel systems not running in dual-channel mode.

 

Thanks for chiming in Plodr. I have minimal experience with Adobe & Flash, so I'm glad you knew what to sugggest. I know we can set him up with persistent storage on the USB stick, but I've been trying to keep the process simple. The guy just wants to try out some Linux distros to see if it's for him, and if so, what he likes best. IMO, he shouldn't have to go through such gyrations just to test it out, although I guess that is his decision to make.

I'm trying to put myself in HIS shoes, as I remember trying out Linux back in 2009 on a Dell Dimension 2400 desktop. Everything seemed to work great and I quickly made a full installation...except the entire machine would periodically lock up and freeze everything, requiring a hard reboot every time. I learned the sequential 'alt-sysq-R-E-I-S-U-B' command early and often in my Linux quest. To make a very long and frustrating story (2+ months of tedious troubleshooting, lock-ups and frustration), I learned my integrated graphics chip was "blacklisted" as being incompatible with Linux. I found a $10 used nVidia graphics card for Dell machines on E-Bay, installed, and TADA!!!! Everything worked fantastic. That machine hasn't crashed, nor frozen, in 4+ years now. I learned a valuable lesson worth a lot more than $10 that day!

If someone had been able to tell me we could spend 2+ months troubleshooting a randomly sporadic error, or we could spend less then $20 on new hardware that was guaranteed to work in Linux, I would've spent the $20. (Of course, then I would've missed the educational value of all the trial & error troubleshooting of that issue?!) Based on his post immediately before this (post #40) regarding the extremely slow download that he gave up on, I believe he is STILL experiencing an underlying issue with his VIA Rhine ethernet card. (flashback visions of my graphics issues as a wannabe linux user!) I really want to help this guy, but if I'm correct, neither switching distros nor destop environments is going to solve this. Unless someone smarter than me (us?!) chimes in with a linux-newbie-friendly solution, I'm starting to believe some of my previously posted $5-$10 solutions are the way to go for this particular machine and this particular situation. If we can just get him over this small but persistent hump, it looks like everything else will fall into place with him. Just my opinion... Your thoughts?

 

Just to throw this out there. I found running Xubuntu a lot lighter weight installation, then running Ubuntu. I found that 13.10 has a lot of issues with the Realtek wifi chipset. Signal would drop, then come up, almost as if the Kernel was putting the adapter to sleep every minute.

If I ran 12.04 LTS (64bit for both version installs), I would have no problems with WiFi. Signal would stay strong, no drop outs, ran like a champ. I did have to play around with the Samba settings, until I got it so that it would not come up with errors all of the time, when trying to connect to the NAS.

NFS was easy to setup to the NAS, once I found the correct site, with the information I needed. If anyone is having issues with Samba, I can send them my smb.conf that I used, that worked like a champ.

I still have the image though cloned on my NAS. I used Clonezilla to clone it, so that I would not have to reinstall all programs, and fix all settings every time, I was testing between 12.04 & 13.10.

 

I'm running on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS right now. Working pretty well . Installed to hard drive,and after applying updates fixed it pretty good. In reference to Plodr's post about Flash, I had trouble getting before full install. But it is there. Was a little tricky for me. Also could not upgrade firefox before full install. Update took care of that.
Bootloader screen has very small print. Almost have to put on my 3.0 readers.

 

AWESOME! Congrats Shade!

If I hadn't been pre-occupied with your other issues, I should've remembered that Adobe Flash is considered proprietary software and is NOT available on a LiveUSB. :-o LOL on the bootloader screen!

Just out of curiousity, how did you address the lagging ethernet issues? Wireless? Share the knowledge of your success for the next brave soul!

 

I only use Chrome. Even with FF on Xubuntu, I had no problems with Flash. It ran right off the start with no problems.

 

I might have spoke a little too soon on the flash thing. Seems to be a issue right now for a lot of linux users, Adobe is not supporting. At least no more updates for flash.
It could be that, and a combination of lack of support for my video that is causing a problem playing videos from yu tube, etc.. I get some to play with hardware acceleration disabled. Quality not real good.
Any body think my old Rage video card would help ? Might not be able to find drivers for that either.

Did not do anything to address the ethernet issue. Not sure why but its working.

 

I tried Chrome too. Firefox tells me there are no flash plug in updates available, but it does not have the latest version.
I

 

Well Chrome has its own built-in flash player, so if Chrome doesn't solve the issue, it likely isn't flash related. I'd think your video card/acceleration is the culprit. But there are some easy steps to take before you jump to video card. My Ubuntu 12.04 installation is completely up-to-date with Firefox 26 and Flash 11.2 (the last version for Linux). What are your versions? Have you installed the Flash plugin manually, or did you just make a default installation? To make certain you have the latest version of Flash for linux, open a terminal (ctr-alt-T) and type:

Code:

sudo apt-get install flashplugin-nonfree

This will either install flash, or inform you that your existing flash is the most recent version. If you have the most recent version, are any of these applicable, or helpful to you?

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/install-flash-plugin-view-videos-animations-games

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/979727

If none of the above are helpful, we can move to the video card. What is the make/model of your "Rage" card?

 

It appears that linux DOES support ATI Rage video cards, despite their age. I don't know how many different models there are, but the 128 keeps popping up. Is this your ATI Rage card?

http://linux.die.net/man/4/r128

It can be made to work, as discussed in Arch forums (Arch folks like to "roll their own" software from source) but it will be a task. Once again, not really a newbie friendly task. Plus, that card looks like it might be a step back from your onboard graphics? It also appears that 3D acceleration of the Rage is disabled by default, due to varying configurations on various versions of Xorg in various distros required to successfully enable 3D acceleration.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-r128/+bug/1017036

Regardless, it can be made to work. For future reference, there is a hardware "sweet spot" for Linux, IMO. The latest & greatest hardware isn't appropriate (yet?!), as developers either haven't formulated an open source driver yet, or the driver can be considered Beta or RC and isn't quite mature or tweaked for performance yet. Conversely, older hardware and/or less popular hardware (you seem to have BOTH, LOL) falls further down or just gets dropped off the list so developers can focus limited resources on the aforementioned latest & greatest hardware. The hardware sweet spot is somewhere in between. In my opinion, for me personally, I believe the sweet spot is Windows7-era hardware, before UEFI and Secure-boot were fully implemented. That is the hardware I tend to consider FIRST, although some Windows8 hardware is certainly not a problem. This is just a generalized statement for future consideration, FWIW.