Win 2k?

[lulzfish]

nLite is a tool used to remove unnecessary stuff from Windows XP [Like IE, Media Player] and automate the install process.

Unfortunately, NLITE STILL PRODUCES X86 CODE.
THERE IS NO WAY TO PLAY WINDOWS GAMES IN WINDOWS ON THE PANDORA UNLESS MICROSOFT AND THE GAME COMPANIES SPONTANEOUSLY PORT EVERYTHING THEMSELVES / OPEN-SOURCE IT ALL.

And even that would take weeks or months or years depending on how people are working on it.

As for difficulty, the hardware support problems are just a matter of hardware vendors sucking up to Microsoft and making sure Windows works with all their hardware. The Pandora is made for Linux, and it won't have those sorts of problems.

The other problems new Linux users are likely to have are mostly interface problems, which you can only solve by messing around with it long enough that you learn where everything is.

But in a working system with Linux pre-installed, it's actually very easy to use, and you won't need the commandline for anything.

 

[Chip]

Source code is not available. If the code were available, it would be illegal to use it. If it were legal, it would be useless, as no applications are compiled for Win-on-ARM.

It is not possible no matter how many "what-ifs" you're willing to concede.

It's not the same animal at all, but this thread has raised my interest in seeing how feasible win2k or (more likely, due to memory constraints) win9x would be virtualized on a Pandora. QEMU seems to already support ARM to a degree (it's listed as "Testing").

x86 emulation on ARM is slow. As fast as the Pandora is, it will be far too slow for any useful work to be done under a Windows install. Preliminary tests put x86 emulation speeds somewhere in the high 386 / low 486 range. You might be able to play some minesweeper under Win3.1, but anything more than that ain't happening.

 

[Username]

But what if you use an X86 emulator to run an Amiga emulator and have that run a Gameboy emulator. Then you could play Blue Version on an Amiga on an X86 machine on your Pandora.

@lulzfish: stop with the caps please.

 

[Vladsharp]

I have always though that computers are all about offering me functionality rather than programs - and aside from particular games, what sort of functionality does Linux not provide? (The "aside from particular games" comment refers to the fact that it would be unreasonable to expect something like Fallout 3 to work on such a tiny console, for example. In fact, why do we not find it unreasonable that some titles only work on the Wii, others only on the Xbox 360 and yet others are PS3 exclusives? )

 

[hch]

would it theoretically be possible to port win2k on the pandora if you had the source?
I remember that the source was leaked few years back.

i know its illegal - Im just speaking in hypothetical terms

from what i know w2k code is nearly unportable.they tried for alpha and itanium and i seem to remember that it was a mess. i think on the itanium netbsd took a few hours to get ported, linux a day or two. w2k however was taking weeks.

so, i guess even with source that would be a tremendous task (and quite useless too)

 

[PoisonedV]

Linux is still too hard to understand

I'm a Linux user and I find Windows too hard to understand. It seems from the few times I have used it (since I switched from win98) that it's missing a lot of functionality I take for granted. I have no idea what a .dbe file is or what 'n-Lited Windows XP + SP3 integrated' means.

wow, i guess you should do a bit of research before you try pirating something, huh?

and people who argue that linux is easier to use than windows are being stubborn.

 

[valhalla]

compare it to android. I dont NEED it. but it would be nice having it TOO.

there is a big difference between android and windows on the pandora: android is something that is made exactly for this kind of hardware (well, handheld phones rather than handheld consoles, but they have the same arch and similar hw restrictions) and is open source, so a 3rd party port is perfectly feasible. windows is made for a different arch, with different hardware contraints, and is definitely closed source, so even if somebody did port it he couln't even claim credit.

QUOTE
there are just alot of games on windows that would run on a device like pandora (in terms of specs)
like diablo 2 or starcraft (plz dont tell me to play the n64 version of starcraft -.- )


and they wouldn't work anyway

and people who argue that linux is easier to use than windows are being stubborn.

no, we are just used to linux and not to the intricacies of windows

to me a POSIXy CLI is easier and more confortable to use than a linux GUI, and both are easier than windows

 

[Klepto]

and people who argue that linux is easier to use than windows are being stubborn.

Perhaps, but I was arguing that Linux is easier for me to use. I suspect that people will find whatever they know easier, and for most that means Windows. For me and many others here it means Linux. Most of the posts I read that say 'Linux is too hard' actually mean 'Linux is too different' IMO.

 

[Svartalf]

BSOD, just as an example

Heh... Worse comes to worse, I can put a service in Linux that simulates a BSOD. Not that anyone in their right mind would WANT that, but it could be done...

 

[WoD]

I never understand why people want windows. What would you want to do in it that you can't do in Linux?

Visual Studio.NET



As a career user of Visual Studio.NET I can only say: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

 

[Capn_Fish]

and people who argue that linux is easier to use than windows are being stubborn.

Perhaps, but I was arguing that Linux is easier for me to use. I suspect that people will find whatever they know easier, and for most that means Windows. For me and many others here it means Linux. Most of the posts I read that say 'Linux is too hard' actually mean 'Linux is too different' IMO.

I personally find Windows harder to use/do normal tasks with, though I don't personally know anybody else with that opinion.

Just an example: A friend was trying to get on a wired network with his Vista laptop. It wouldn't work, no matter what I tried. The "network" dialogs just go in a circle from one unhelpful dialog to the next. I don't know if similar things exist in Windows, but in Linux at least I know I can use ifconfig, iwconfig (and wpa_supplicant), and usually a dhcp client. to get such things working.

I'd say that the whole "Linux is confusing" thing comes at least partially from most people learning Windows to begin with, so it's familiar. Anything else is different, hence "harder" to learn (due to mental blocks of "I can't learn this" and the oft-ignored fact that learning Windows had challenges at the very beginning as well).

Take what you will from that.

 

[cb88]

saying modern Linux is too hard ... is like the people in the late 80s early 90's saying computers are too hard or will never be of use it is a fad

my mom can use Linux (with WIFI at that...) and my 8 year old cousins can use Linux

Using Linux doesn't mean Installing it... IMO cause probably 50% of computer users couldn't install XP to save their lives just think about that before you say I'm way off base there

 

[conso]

100% agree.
90% of the persons who argue linux was inferior to use are originally satisfied windows-users who don't want to "waste time" learning the basics. Linux is a different OS, with capital different. Problems are often solved in another way, it's administered in another way. Using Linux on the other hand is as easy as can be. My mom can use it, my girlfriend, my uncle, my sister, my nephew, my pa, my best friend, his ma, his girlfriend, her brother. They are all perfectly satisfied since they are working with a system someone with slight knowledge administers over the net. They know how to install apps, cause someone showed them how easy it is if you don't try to do it like in windows. Yes, there is a way to install apps over a gui, but the reason most instructions in wikis and forums sound like "sudo apt-get install what-u-need" is that it's way shorter to write then "open synaptic, type in your password, click on search, type 'what-u-need', doubleclick 'what-u-need' and click confirm".

One thing to add: the pandora devs put a lot of effort to make it even easier for windows users to use it. Hardware-drivers will be pre-installed, software will be installed in form of extracting an zip-file to your sd-card. You will click on a menu-entry to start a program and use a gui to configure the internet.

 

[Kyo]

I never understand why people want windows. What would you want to do in it that you can't do in Linux?

Run an application that does not crash.

I got tired of windows a few months ago and switched to linux. Nothing works, everything crashes. My mouse stops being able to click at random times, pidgin, firefox and many other programs crash on a daily basis, pidgin on a hourly basis even.

 

[darkowl]

Just going to add to the POV that Linux is easier to use than windows (once you get used to it), in Linux you know where everything is and you get used to the way things are done. I can definitely see where people are coming from with the windows is easier to use though, with windows you have a GUI for practically every task, a gui makes configuration easy for someone since they are presented with all the options rather than some text file which requires you to read up on options (you aren't likely to guess valid options for a program like samba or cups). However I will say that it's possible to know Linux like that back of your hand and that you don't have to be particularly smart to do it either, for example I use Linux . Once you have a few tricks and an idea of the basic layout it becomes second nature.

On the software front, it's the same thing really, you have to get used to it. I find it hard to live without a package manager. With Windows you have to be on guard constantly, you can't just "sudo apt-get install" or "sudo synaptic", you have to make sure you aren't installing a virus or adware. I've also heard it's possible to have you computer compromised a few seconds after connecting to the internet, I can't imagine dealing with that sort of thing really, I just hope thats an urban legend. Well whatever you use, just so long as it's the right tool for the job, at the end of the day that's what counts.

EDIT: Also trying to find help when things go wrong on windows is very difficult, you come across tons of irrelevant information and sometimes the problem isn't solvable.

 

[conso]

I never understand why people want windows. What would you want to do in it that you can't do in Linux?

Run an application that does not crash.

I got tired of windows a few months ago and switched to linux. Nothing works, everything crashes. My mouse stops being able to click at random times, pidgin, firefox and many other programs crash on a daily basis, pidgin on a hourly basis even.

Did you check the logs and your ram? Tried a different kernel-version? Just as a hint, this thread is already off-topic, so giving support on certain linux problems would go to far (no, that behaviour isn't typical at all, there is a problem with your computer, may it be hardware or software, so don't complain but search for help on the support-pages of your distribution).

 

[lulzfish]

Kyosys said: "I got tired of windows a few months ago and switched to linux. Nothing works, everything crashes. My mouse stops being able to click at random times, pidgin, firefox and many other programs crash on a daily basis, pidgin on a hourly basis even."

What distro are you using and what kind of computer is it?
I hope I don't sound like a jerk here arguing against your stability problems, but my laptop runs Ubuntu 8.10 fine with only a few GUI setting adjustments to install the nvidia drivers and enable Compiz.

 

[darkowl]

I never understand why people want windows. What would you want to do in it that you can't do in Linux?

Run an application that does not crash.

I got tired of windows a few months ago and switched to linux. Nothing works, everything crashes. My mouse stops being able to click at random times, pidgin, firefox and many other programs crash on a daily basis, pidgin on a hourly basis even.


what does "dmesg" say?

 

[Username]

Linux is not as easy as Windows. For one thing, the Ubuntu install (for example) was a bit buggy for me. It would freeze at a frozen point in the pre-installation config and I would have to restart and try again. I'm not saying Linux is worse, but as far as stability goes I will have to vouch for Windows.

 

[PhillipJ]

I never understand why people want windows. What would you want to do in it that you can't do in Linux?

Visual Studio.NET


SharpDevelop + Mono would do that for you. I don't suppose either of those will be ported but if for some unfathomable reason your desperately needed a .NET dev environment on your pocket-sized computer it would probably be easier to get some existing, current open-source software ported rather than attempt to port an obsolete, proprietary OS that is in most ways inferior to any Linux distro you might install.