Win 7 or Linux?

[LarryRF 0]

Hello all,I'm a Win 7 64 bit user. I have Ubutu Linux installed on a seperate partition but have not played with it much..So, on to my question..any performance advantages from wiin 7 to linux? Is one quicker than the other?I would like to try XPX on Linux, but to be honest, I don't know anything about linux and have no idea how to go about getting the exe to install :( LOL..If someone could drop a hint on how to get the program to install, I'd appreciate it :( tried the usual win double click but no joy.Thanks

[carrotroot 77]

Hmm ... are you running 64Bit Ubuntu? and what release are you running? 11.10? or something earlier?

Edited January 17, 2012 by carrotroot

[Tom Wright 438]

Windows 7. I installed Ubuntu 11.10 on a partition on my machine for a play around, but I could never use it as my main platform, it would frustrate the hell out of me. Simple things like installing drivers take a day of searching around for the correct commands to bash into the terminal. I could never get any sound to play through my TV's speakers when using HDMi output -something which Windows recognises instantly. I prefer Mac OS X to both of them to be honest, but out of the two you mention I'd have to pick Windows 7!

[Mountain Man 142]

Unless you're using nonstandard hardware, Ubuntu should pretty much work "out of the box".Anyway, I've tried X-Plane 10 in both Linux and Windows on the same computer and saw no notable performance differences.

[LarryRF 0]

Thanks guys for the opinions....I am running 64 bit Umbutu, I believe its the latest version but I would need to check.My hardware is fairly standard, first system in my sig.So what am I missing with the installation? I keep hearing things about terminals and such...how would I go about installing xplane to umbutuThanks !

[jasonX 24]

copy your xpx installation into your home dir in linux.Then download from xplane.com the linux updater.run the the linux updaterand it will update your xpx installation to run in linux.I think from memory the only files it needs to change for linux are the exe ones, but let the updater worry about that.I see you are having a look at linux. It's a great system, I do use the terminal a lot but it is quite usable without the terminal these days. Stick with the software updater and stuff. It's a long road learning Linux, some try it once or twice and then delete everything and come online spouting how terrible it is, but same as most things, spend some time with it then you reap the benefits.PS I almost never use windows. Haven't done for years now. I have a copy on a second drive to play rfactor occasionally but even that runs perfectly in linux now but I couldn't get past the "authenticate your copy stuff".

Edited January 18, 2012 by jasonX

[carrotroot 77]

I am running 64 bit Umbutu ....

Sounds like you are missing the 32bit compatibility libraries (ia32-libs).To install them open up a terminal window and type:sudo apt-get install ia32-libsAlso, like Jason said, if you already have X-Plane installed on a Windows partition, just re-run the DVD-installer and perform just the base install, and copy over (or link using ln -s) the Global Scenery directory to your new install.

[MdMax 233]

Hello !

any performance advantages from wiin 7 to linux? Is one quicker than the other?

Yes, check this test (CI7 column for a Intel/Nvidia system):Source:http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_windows_part1&num=9http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_windows_part1&num=2With a high resolution GNU/Linux is better. With add-ons like the CRJ-200, GNU/Linux is also a lot better. See the manual page 10, or the link to the X-Pilot.com forum, "15 frames more":http://www.jrollon.com/CRJ.htmlhttp://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=51431&view=findpost&p=573614If you get an error message, don't forget to install the Nvidia proprietary driver, and please read also these topics:http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=45077http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=45606Happy flying !

[Muskoka 104]

I'm with Tom on this one.....I just uninstalled Ubuntu 11.10 64bit from a dual boot with Win7. Ubuntu / AMD (ATI) drivers were a real pain to try and get set-up. Th post release drivers wouldn't even install, a known issue. The driver direct from AMD installed after some fiddling, but there were issues. Unlike Windows, Linux didn't recognize my Passive Dvi adaptor for my triple monitor set-up, meaning I would have to buy an Active adapter to get Eyefinity to work. The Anti Aliasing was all messed up. First off, with the proprietary drivers, AA wouldn't work, unless I used HDR. Then with HDR on, the FXAA mode looked better than 4X SSAA Quad Renderer. Didn't matter if I had AA set in the CCC or not, without HDR on it wouldn't work.My Saitek yoke / Throttle quadrant wasn't properly recognized. The clock / stop watch on the front won't work, there's no drivers to fix the issue. My bu0836x board's that I use for my rotary encoders, toggle switches and push buttons for my home cockpit were always conflicting with the buttons and switches on the Saitek equipment. Oh, and the Hat switch doesn't work without a bit of a workaround.These "snags", plus the fact that it didn't run any better than my Windows set-up were enough for me to make the decision to uninstall it. I only use this as my gaming / simulation rig, so I'll stick with what works best out of the box. Not being able to test my Eyefinity set-up, I couldn't compare it to my usual 3840x1024 resolution that I run in Win7. But, with one monitor at 1280x1024 there was no difference in performance, speed wise, but there was the issues with AA in Ubuntu.Don't get me wrong, I like playing around in Linux. But as a gaming platform, where Windows has years of experience and 3rd party backing from developers (drivers and such) Linux still doesn't cut it. For regular computing, workstation, server, everday get on the net machine, their great, leave the gaming to Windows for now. Just to add, I wouldn't even consider a Mac, I want control over all the guts of my machine, let alone the ridiculous price. At least with Linux that's not an issue. They both have their place, gaming isn't it. I suppose for those that have a beef with Microsoft, and refuse to use a Windows set-up for whatever reason, these are there only alternatives. Seems a shame to me, as Windows 7 is a great operating system, far better that an previous version. Sure, I had to pay $100 to get it, but everything just works, and works great without any issues.Glen

[Tom Wright 438]

I wouldn't even consider a Mac, I want control over all the guts of my machine

I think this is a common misconception people have with Macs, that everything is completely locked down from the user. This is simply not the case. It is just as customizable/tweakable as Windows and Linux. It's built on the same Unix foundation as Linux is, and has the same Terminal that uses all the same commands. Windows is actually the oddball here; stripped back there are more similarities between Mac and Linux than either with Windows. An advantage of Mac is that there is no need for virus protection, and it's more stable. Even Windows 7 still can't quite shake its roots from the very earliest Windows; it's still built on 'the registry' and thousands of dlls! OS X is a far more streamlined OS. You are right about the price though, granted they are inherently expensive. But I love my Mac! Edited January 18, 2012 by Tom Wright

[Muskoka 104]

Think you missed my point Tom,I want to build my systems from the ground up. I want the ability to pick and choose "every single" component that goes into that system. Can I do that with a Mac, don't think so. It's like buying a Dell, sort of. :smile:Edit: I will never own a Mac for that very reason. Now, if they would make their systems totally customizable, and I mean totally, then I would consider it.Glen

Edited January 18, 2012 by Muskoka

[Tom Wright 438]

Ah ok fair enough. I think the Mac Pro's hardware is customizable to some extent, but the price is rediculous!

[Mountain Man 142]

An advantage of Mac is that there is no need for virus protection...

Only because nobody bothers to write viruses for Macs for whatever reason and not because they're inherently more secure. In fact, several security studies (ZDNet; ComputerWorld) have found that Mac OS is the least secure of the big three operating systems (Windows, Mac, Linux). In a contest last March, one "hacker" was able to compromise MacOS in less than 5-seconds by taking advantge of a Safari vulnerability.

[fvapres 7]

It's kinda like in the good old days of exploration of the world, when one civiliation would interact with another for the first time, the diseases would jump from one group to the other. Since the natives didn't have the anti-bodies to deal with the new viruses on the explorers, many became sick and died.Mac has NO antibodies at current as it has no viruses of major renown to cope with. When and if the day comes that hackers have an interest to target MacOS, the tables on that very subject will change heavily. Just because nobody is targeting you now doesn't mean you can let your defenses waver and Mac has done just that for as long as I remember.

Edited January 20, 2012 by fvapres