🚀 go-pugleaf

Is there a version of Linux that runs stable on
Windows 95 or Windows NT?  Can anyone point me
out to where I can get those free versions?

Thanks in advance.

: Is there a version of Linux that runs stable on
: Windows 95 or Windows NT?  Can anyone point me
: out to where I can get those free versions?

: Thanks in advance.

You have obviously never user Linux before.  If so you would not have just 
asked the wuestion you did, but that's OK.  Some of us in this newsgroup are
more than happy to help the uninitiated.

First of all, Linux is an OS, just like Win95/NT/etc.  Let me correct myself
Linux is an OS, nothing like any Windows OS.  Linux is far more stable,
efficient, and affordable (like free).  A computer can only run one OS at a 
time, however, you can have many OSes loaded, and choose which one you boot
into.  In fact, most Linux users, I think, are reluctant Win95/NT users.  This
is because of support for specfic apps which are not available under Linux.

Linux can be setup to run on a box which also runs WinXX as mentioned above.
You can even setup the Linux OS to read the files from your WinXX OS
partitions.  This can be very convenient if you are forced to use apps on 
the Windows side.

Now, to answer what I suspect to be more questions.  I would recommend that
you get a copy of RedHet 5.x from either the web for a nominal fee (<$5), or
run out to CompUSA and get the retail version for about $60.  The retail 
version includes a pretty good book from what I have heard, but that is really
the only difference.  Why spend the extra $ for a retail version, 1) the
book, 2) keeping RedHat, or one of the other Linux distributions in business.
Personally I like to have a choice in life, and not have my computer OS
shoved down my throat my one Mr. Bill.

Well, once you have some copy of Linux in your hot little hands, check back
here to find the additional help you mey need.

--
  Scott Nipp   DSC Workstation Service   Sprint Paranet Technical Analyst
    Phone: 477-9645   Work: snipp@spd.dsccc.com   Home: nipp@swbell.net

On Thu, 2 Jul 1998 21:14:39 +0700, Supaporn wrote:
 >
 >Is there a version of Linux that runs stable on
 >Windows 95 or Windows NT?  Can anyone point me
 >out to where I can get those free versions?

Linux doesn't run "on" Win95/NT.  But it can be installed
on a separate partition so that you can boot either Linux
*or* Win95/NT.  Go to sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs.

Bob T.

Scott Nipp wrote:

> Now, to answer what I suspect to be more questions.  I would recommend that
> you get a copy of RedHet 5.x from either the web for a nominal fee (<$5), or
> run out to CompUSA and get the retail version for about $60. 
             ^^^^^^^
This might be a little tricky in Thailand where the original message
originated from :-)

Nick

Um. Linux IS an operating system. Unlike win95, it doesn't run on anything like
dos - just itself.

Supaporn wrote:
> 
> Is there a version of Linux that runs stable on
> Windows 95 or Windows NT?  Can anyone point me
> out to where I can get those free versions?
> 
> Thanks in advance.

*sigh*

Another person that thinks their computer will only run windows.





Adam
-- 
                          ------------------------
                          |  Remove the NO-SPAM  |
                          ------------------------

On Fri, 3 Jul 1998, Rob Nelson wrote:

> Um. Linux IS an operating system. Unlike win95, it doesn't run on anything like
> dos - just itself.
> 
> 
	actually no
	windows cannot run linux
	but linux can run windows:
		bochs	-	low level portable (slow) x86 emulator
		xdos	-	slightly faster dos emulator
		wabi	-	Windows emulator
		wine	-	Better windows emulator
		
	in fact linux can run almost every known OS i have ever
	used:
		vMac	-	Macintosh Plus
		UAE	-	Amiga 500
		bochs	-	i386
		xmame	-	almost any arcade game from the 80's
		frodos	-	Comidor 64 emulator
		....etc

	Linux is the future.
	What it cannot run, it will emulate!

	-ian reinhart geiser


.-----------------------------------------------------------.
|[]                   NeXT Generation                    [X]|
|--------------------------,--------------------------------.
|  PC Network Specialist,  | Office:	CCSD Data Center    |
|  Macintosh Specialist @  | Phone:     414.277.4528        |
|  Milwaukee School of     |	                            |
|        Engineering       |--------------------------------|
|                          |                                |
|   ian reinhart geiser    | phone:   414.220.9683          |
|   Apt #510A              | email:   geiseri@msoe.edu      |
|   1029 N Jackson St      | web:     www.msoe.edu/~geiseri |
|   Milwaukee, WI 53202    |  NeXT/Be/Cyberdog Mail okay!   |
|                          |   MIME or BinHex prefered      |
|--------------------------'--------------------------------|
'-----------------------------------------------------------'

I've ordered from LSL before, and had no problems. Right now, you
can get Slackware 3.4 and 3.5 for about $1.95. There are also similar
deals to for other distributions such as Redhat and debian if I remember
correctly.


Anthony Lausin
Disgruntled Linux Users' Group

ian reinhart geiser wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 3 Jul 1998, Rob Nelson wrote:

>         actually no
>         windows cannot run linux
>         but linux can run windows:
>                 bochs   -       low level portable (slow) x86 emulator
>                 xdos    -       slightly faster dos emulator
>                 wabi    -       Windows emulator
>                 wine    -       Better windows emulator
> 

Do you really think WINE is better than WABI? I'm curious about whether
WABI's a solid investment or not.


A. Lausin
Disgruntled Linux Users' Group

"9 out of 10 monkeys prefer Windows NT because it emulates
productivity...the 10th monkey didn't understand the question."

WABI is made by Caldera who also make OpenLinux and DR-DOS (a very good
DOS - it can detect a linux partition without screwing up). WABI is a
commercial product. http://www.caldera.com

WINE is free (at least my outdate release was). http://www.winhq.com

Don't know anything about XDOS, but I'd love to hear
something...anyone??


A. Lausin
Disgruntled Linux Users' Group

A sledgehammer is not a valid anestetic.



Mark Haase wrote:
> 
> umm... important point. what do they cost and where can they be found?

In article <6np6ee$4lv@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
	Anthony Lausin <"[Lausant"@worldnet.att.net]-remove_brackets> writes:
> WABI is made by Caldera who also make OpenLinux and DR-DOS (a very good
> DOS - it can detect a linux partition without screwing up). WABI is a
> commercial product. http://www.caldera.com
> 

WABI is made by Sun Microsystems.  They ported it to Linux and Caldera is
the vendor for Linux WABI.



-- 
George Bonser

Microsoft! Which end of the stick do you want today?

However:

VMS --> WNT     i.e. Add one letter to each letter in VMS.

Isn't Windows NT as much of an operating system as VMS?
After all, didn't a transplanted DEC VMS team write
Windows NT?  I'm told that much of the low level handling
is similar to VMS.  Anybody know more?

I have personally run Linux for about five years and DEC
Ultrix for a lot longer than that, but I still fire up
the Windows for Workgroups "program loader" to run M$ Word.
I also use other professional software like language trans-
lators and an Oxford English dictionary, encyclopedias,
Borland compilers, as well as unsupported software...

I'm shifting to LaTeX/REVTex these days and am hoping that
the LaTeX compatible WYSIWYG LyX keeps getting better
with respect to the equation editor.  It looks promising at
version 0.13.

Still, the only thing I don't like about Win NT is that
they left behind the old windows look and usage.  I mean
why would anyone want to go through pop up menus that
cover the whole screen just to load a little used program?
And click the "Start" button to stop???  I wish they had
a Windows 3.11 style compatability mode with a program
manager, similar looks, etc...

I am considering adding Win NT 4.0 before they come up
with some Win NT 98 thingy with automatic Exploder install.
There are a lot of people out there that write neat stuff
for the M$ platforms.  But I will never go Windows 95, 98,
... , series diverges, ...

Dale Woodside
Macquarie University
mailto:dale@mpce.mq.edu.au

Dale Woodside wrote in message <35A414C9.2256@mpce.mq.edu.au>...
>VMS --> WNT     i.e. Add one letter to each letter in VMS.


True, and it wasn't pure chance that it ended up like that.
The IBM <-> HAL (HAL9000 from 2001) thing was pure chance.

>Still, the only thing I don't like about Win NT is that
>they left behind the old windows look and usage.  I mean
>why would anyone want to go through pop up menus that
>cover the whole screen just to load a little used program?
>And click the "Start" button to stop???  I wish they had
>a Windows 3.11 style compatability mode with a program
>manager, similar looks, etc...


Click on the Start button, select Run, type in "progman"
and hit enter. Enjoy ;-)

>I am considering adding Win NT 4.0 before they come up
>with some Win NT 98 thingy with automatic Exploder install.

It's called NT 5.0 and it's looks like 98. Like all MS products
it still needs to reboot to change even the most basic settings.

As someone once wrote "Windows has detected that the mouse has
moved, please reboot for this change to take effect".

Cheers.
--   .   +-------------------------------------------------------+
 ,--_|\  | John Saunders    mailto:John.Saunders@scitec.com.au   |
/  Oz  \ | SCITEC LIMITED   Phone +61294289563  Fax +61294289933 |
\_,--\_/ | "By the time you make ends meet, they move the ends." |
      v  +-------------------------------------------------------+

It's 09 Jul 98  11:54,
We'll return to dale@mpce.mq.edu.au and All's
discussion of Linux and Windows NT...

 da> Isn't Windows NT as much of an operating system as VMS?
 da> After all, didn't a transplanted DEC VMS team write
 da> Windows NT?  I'm told that much of the low level handling
 da> is similar to VMS.  Anybody know more?

I've heard this ine before, but am unable to either confirm or deny
this.

 da> Still, the only thing I don't like about Win NT is that
 da> they left behind the old windows look and usage.  I mean
 da> why would anyone want to go through pop up menus that
 da> cover the whole screen just to load a little used program?
 da> And click the "Start" button to stop???  I wish they had
 da> a Windows 3.11 style compatability mode with a program
 da> manager, similar looks, etc...

I guess it's a matter of preference.  While the "95 style" gui gets in
the way sometimes, I find it less restrictive than the Windows 3.x
interface of NT 3.51.  That was more fiddly in both WFWG and NT 3.51,
IMHO.

 da> I am considering adding Win NT 4.0 before they come up
 da> with some Win NT 98 thingy with automatic Exploder install.
 da> There are a lot of people out there that write neat stuff
 da> for the M$ platforms.  But I will never go Windows 95, 98,
 da> ... , series diverges, ...

I don't use 95 here (or 98 for that matter :) ).  Windows on this box is
NT4, which is OK, but still suffers from some shortcomings:

It's not as stable as advertised, I have a handful of ordinary user apps
guaranteed to either hang the system or give a BSOD. :-(

Networking is a little suspect at times, I find Windows networking code
tends to "hang" the system when things are a bit slow on the wire,
unlike Linux, where even a total session hang (e.g. accessing a NFS hard
mount that just fell off the face of the earth), has little effect on
the rest of the system.  The equivalent NT scenario would bog the system
down (even something as inocuous as trying to pull news from a dead news
server slows things to a crawl).  Still it's not as bad as in 95, where
accessing a just vanished share would often hang the system.

On a similar note, Explorer (i.e. the desktop one, not IE) seems to be
single threaded.  Tie that up, and the rest of the system is hard to
manage. :(

One day at work, the network was acting up so much, 95 kept hanging.  I
ended up giving Windows away for the day and booting my concealed Linux
partition.  That fixed the problem, no more hangs and general carry on.
:)  Then I got something done. :-)

... OS/2? What's that? Half of an Operating System?
--
| Fidonet:  Tony Langdon 3:632/367.2
| Internet: tlang@freeway.DIALix.oz.au
|
| Freeway Internet Gateway, Melbourne, Australia.  For information about
| our services and conditions of use, e-mail:
| info@freeway.DIALix.oz.au, to receive a copy of the FAQ.

Tony Langdon (tlang@freeway.DIALix.oz.au) wrote:
: It's 09 Jul 98  11:54,
: We'll return to dale@mpce.mq.edu.au and All's
: discussion of Linux and Windows NT...

:  da> Isn't Windows NT as much of an operating system as VMS?
:  da> After all, didn't a transplanted DEC VMS team write
:  da> Windows NT?  I'm told that much of the low level handling
:  da> is similar to VMS.  Anybody know more?

: I've heard this ine before, but am unable to either confirm or deny
: this.

Dave Cutler, one of the original 3 VMS architects I believe, was also a 
principal designer of NT.  Ive also heared that reading an NT internals
book is quite a bit like reading a VMS internals text in terms of naming
conventions and general design. However, Cutler left VMS engineering quite
a while before the current verion.


:  da> Still, the only thing I don't like about Win NT is that
:  da> they left behind the old windows look and usage.  I mean
:  da> why would anyone want to go through pop up menus that
:  da> cover the whole screen just to load a little used program?
:  da> And click the "Start" button to stop???  I wish they had
:  da> a Windows 3.11 style compatability mode with a program
:  da> manager, similar looks, etc...

It does! Program manager lives on (think its called PROGMAN.EXE), and
there is a registry setting that you can change to make it the shell
(err, window manager?) interface.  You can even set CMD.EXE to be the
'login shell'.  I think the NT faq at www.savilletech.com contains the
registry key to do this. If not, email me and im sure I can dig it up.
Also, there are a few explorer replacement projects going on.

jeremy
jkatz at ultrix6 dot cs dot csubak dot edu

Previously, on Linux/NT place Dale W. wrote:

> >And click the "Start" button to stop???  I wish they had
> >a Windows 3.11 style compatability mode with a program
> >manager, similar looks, etc...
> 
John S. wrote:
> 
> Click on the Start button, select Run, type in "progman"
> and hit enter. Enjoy ;-)
> 
Jeremy K. also wrote:
>
> It does! Program manager lives on (think its called PROGMAN.EXE), and
> there is a registry setting that you can change to make it the shell
> (err, window manager?) interface.  You can even set CMD.EXE to be the
> 'login shell'.  I think the NT faq at www.savilletech.com contains the
> registry key to do this. If not, email me and im sure I can dig it up.
> Also, there are a few explorer replacement projects going on.

Cool!  Thanks for the info.  I tried http://www.savilletech.com
but got a DNS domain host not found message.  I do want to get
the NT FAQ now that I know that it is supposed to exist, though.

I had my friend try running progman.exe and he told me over the
phone that it does come up but is empty of program groups/icons.
In principle this is not a problem as I have played with those
for years, but it is too bad that it doesn't come up pre-built.
Nevertheless, I guess that is the way I will go, spending a day
or so building it up.

By the way, I don't use WWG 311 for networking anyway.  I use
Linux, formerly Yggdrasil, now Red Hat 5.0.  As I said before
in this thread, I use WWG 311 more for info/encyclopedia/other
stuff and want to go Win NT 4.0 for better 32 bit support.  (I
still run MS DOS 622 from time to time so will want one DOS-16
partition.  Have done this under Win NT 351 and is no problem.)
But, do most Win 95 things run under Win NT 4.0, I wonder?  I
had problems running Win 95 stuff under Win NT 351...

Dale Woodside
Macquarie University
mailto:dale@mpce.mq.edu.au

>Jeremy K. also wrote:
>>
>> It does! Program manager lives on (think its called PROGMAN.EXE), and
>> there is a registry setting that you can change to make it the shell
>> (err, window manager?) interface.  You can even set CMD.EXE to be the
>> 'login shell'.  I think the NT faq at www.savilletech.com contains the
>> registry key to do this. If not, email me and im sure I can dig it up.
>> Also, there are a few explorer replacement projects going on.
>
Dale Woodside replied:
>Cool!  Thanks for the info.  I tried http://www.savilletech.com
>but got a DNS domain host not found message.  I do want to get
>the NT FAQ now that I know that it is supposed to exist, though.

Thanks to Jeremy K.  I received the NTFAQ.ZIP and will check it
out.  Your return address did not come through so I send thanks
in this post.

By the way, I have not had any trouble with X crashing in Red Hat
5.0.  In the past, when I have had X problems, they always seemed
to do with the particular video card/Xserver.  The new Xfree86
seems to work very well with my Tseng Labs W32p at any resolution
up to the 1280x1024x256 limit, which is what I use mostly.  Cheers!

Dale Woodside
Macquarie University-Sydney
http://www-math.mpce.mq.edu.au/~dalew/