Has Anyone Worked With Linuxfx Also Known As Windowsfx??

Lance1 said:

Run the experiment yourself.

I did... but a different way.

1. I tried to install Ubuntu Mate in Virtualbox. Hit the reliable mystery problem I swear Windows 10 intentionally puts there. VBox used to work reliably years ago.

2. I put Mate on a USB stick. My laptop booted into it but then got a black screen of nada. Twice.

3. On the same stick I tried Phoenix OS, which is a Chinese Android OS notion. This has the easiest process to both put on a stick (no need for Rufus) and try. It worked okay except it has immediate and obvious bugs.

Then, as it happens every time I dabble, I remember why I switched from Mac/Linux to PC: Windows 10 works.

Hi folks
there used to be a similar thing called "Lindows" if I remember correctly from years ago. Didn't end good for "The creator" if memory serves me correct -- apart from all sorts of "Copy right issues" and intellectual copy right considerations

If you want to use Linux there's loads of distros out there --proper stable ones with backing of big organisations such as Red Hat (now part of IBM) etc -- and with the choice of Window Managers you can almost if you want to make it look "More Windows than Windows".

For people who want to try any flavour of Linux --simply either get a "Live Distro" --this boots from a USB without changing your HDD's etc -- or IMO better just install these as VirtualMachines -- you can use Virtual Box or VMWare player - both free on any version of Windows - or if you have PRO etc you can run them under HYPER-V.

@The Pool Man

I've never had serious problems with any version of Linux / or creating live distros -- in fact I have lost count of the number of times I've used a Linux live distro booted from a USB stick to fix odd Windows problems !!! -- I generally use Linux on my main machine with Windows as a VM for running things like Office (EXCEL IMO is still far superior to any iof the "Office clones" out there) and things like Photoshop etc.

One thing IMO that lets Windows down hideously is Networking -- however this thread isn't Linux Vs Windows --both have their places -- just know when to use which !!!! --But these days Linux isn't the beast it once was only used by geeky nerds -- much more mainstream and reliable --most people could use it straight out of the box if they choose a decent distro.

Cheers
jimbo

jimbo45 said:

@The Pool Man

I've never had serious problems with any version of Linux / or creating live distros -- in fact I have lost count of the number of times I've used a Linux live distro booted from a USB stick to fix odd Windows problems !!! -- I generally use Linux on my main machine with Windows as a VM for running things like Office (EXCEL IMO is still far superior to any iof the "Office clones" out there) and things like Photoshop etc.

You said you haven't had serious problems. I'm saying that most newbies to Linux will find VirtualBox as frustrating as booting a live distro from a USB stick. And most of it is Microsoft's fault.

Life used to be beautiful a few years ago with Legacy boot-options. Then somebody decided to 'fix' the bios and all of a sudden VBox and Live Distros are very hard to pull off. Not to you, maybe, but the average user. I don't believe this was an accident. Making it harder to try Linux.

By the by -- Phoenix OS had a feature EVERY major Linux should: it offered to do the Rufus work by itself. When you click the Phoenix installer, one of the options is to make live USB distro. That saves a lot of time for the novice. But Linux doesn't do this because Linux DELIGHTS in complexity. "Just download this... just install it... just set it up this way... just just just -- ".

Every major distro these days should do a quick scan and tell you if the 'live trial' or 'install' will even work before you start. It should tell you if the BIOS is set right, if Hyper V is on, etcetera.

Most PC users I know get frightened at the mere mention of an SFC or a full Defender scan. If they are to be persuaded towards a Linux (to give new life to an old laptop) it has to work flawlessly the first try. Again the Phoenix people have the right idea... but their problem is that the actual code is still buggy.

Imagine an Ubuntu Mate that easily went on a USB stick... checked everything before even trying... installed in a partition drive all by itself... required no bios baloney, no grub salami -- it just worked -- and if you didn't like it... it would easily uninstall and return the USB stick to normal... without having to reclaim any partitions on the stick.

It's not easy yet. It's nowhere near it. Yet.

Ztruker said:

I just installed LinuxFX in a Hyper-V VM. It's okay but pretty slow. Everything seems to work, including network.



Not something I'd care to use much since it's still Linux but overall not bad for a Windows-like version of Linux.

Hi there
If you want Windows why bother to "Replicate it" !!!! --Nothing wrong with "The real thing" if you like it -- also I suspect that some of those logos e.g the Windows like icon might be subject to some sort of trade Marking via Microsoft -- so expect yet anothers lawyers fest some time -- but I don't suppose even the USA or the EU would have much success and enforcing any judgements in China or Russia !!

To make it really work you'd need also to run something like WINE seamlessly so you could get 100% native Windows applications such as Office to run on it --- time and money spent on that for developers would make it cheaper just to buy Windows in the first place!!!!

BTW using "Paravirtualised I/O" on Virtual machines running on HYPER-V. VBOX, VMWare etc does significantly degrade performance -- Disk I/O is one of the biggest performance bottlenecks in Virtual machines --If you can pass through the hardware directly to the VM and use the OS drivers itself (e.g Native I/O as RAW disks) then you'll improve performance no end -- as well as a graphics port --- If you want to go bonkers try passing through a SAS controller -- you can then get a VM to perform around 98.7% of Native speed !!!

Cheers
jimbo