Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
He said WUBI is useless, not Ubuntu in general. And I agree: All WUBI does is install a version of Ubuntu on an image file within the Windows volume and creates an account for you on what is basically a Live HDD. The host name, among other things, is the same as on the Live CD. When I once tested WUBI and opened a terminal I got this prompt:
There is nothing good about this. It is just a modified Live image on a WinBloze HDD in a folder with a kernel among other things that has write permissions. It does do very similar things to a Live CD as well as save the changes when you reboot, but that's about it. And it also does not perform that well: It has a similar performance hit compared with the Live CD - it has the confines of an image file which obviously hampers performance.
Another entrant in this lively thread:
I may have no business here, but I just stopped using Ubuntu myself. It is very easy in some ways; for example, it does wireless internet without a hitch. But that Grub loader seems to take over the master boot record. When my Ubuntu system crashed and I tried to reinstall, it trashed everything else and insisted on splitting partitions (which is admittedly a hysterical and imprecise way of putting it, but I had to live through all this). I am back with Slackware, which makes many things unnecessarily difficult, but at least on installation it uses LILO and lets you tell it what to do. You install Windows first, as it hogs the MBR to itself, then put Linux in another partition. It is then easy to accommodate Windows.
Distribution: slackware 12.2, scientific linux 6.4, knoppix 7.2, salix 14.1
You shouldn't uninstall ubuntu before properly setting your bootloader. There is Windows command which reinstalls
a Windows's bootloader. I don't want to give a name of this command - I used it once to fix a similar problem
but it was some time ago. But I am sure you will find help about that on Internet. My proposition is to change a partition type of the partition used by ubuntu to Windows partition and create there NTFS file system. This partition will be viewed within Windows as a disk. I rather discourage you if you plan to resize your native Windows partition. Next time
try LiveCD Linux's distros or on USB drives. Particularly on USB are really fast. The other possibility is to use Virtual Box or install on Windows. All these solutions are safe and well suited for people like you who are 'not sure'. Greetings.
I would personally, OP, click on the "Ubuntu Daily Build" link in my signature to try the 10.10 beta, which makes partitioning your HDD easy as heck -- perhaps on par with Mac OS X's Boot Camp Assistant, if not even easier: Essentially, there's a slider that you can specifically position to allocate space, basically with one stroke of the mouse. All you have to do is hold down the left mouse button and slide the partition allocation slider to the space you want. It's that simple!
This appeared to get active again, sorry for the late response.
Also, if I said Ubuntu sucked, I was more then likely trying to say it served no purpose to me at the time, I put it on as an extra thing just for fun, but started to run out of disc space and so i thought uninstalling ubuntu would clear it up. Instead I cleared out some other stuff and now i have tons of free space, so I'm keeping ubuntu. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
I thought you meant that you felt Ubuntu was useless because in Windows you can do everything you can in Ubuntu, so you wanted to get rid of it. Unless you do something that you know is impossible in Linux, why not try it?
Agreed with MTK358. Linux is what you make of it, and just because you can do anything in Windows that you can in Linux does NOT mean you HAVE to use WinBloze. For example, using M$ Office instead of LibreOffice or OpenOffice.org serves no purpose. I have seen it done in one of my schools before: One of the teachers was using OO (which was installed on ALL the school computers) but he decided to install his own M$ Office on the computer and has yet to explain why. I told him there's no use in using proprietary software for tasks that could be done in FOSS: in particular, if it does the job (as in just does the job, not "does the job with a hard-to-navigate GUI and 'features' that really are useless), then there's no need to use something else.