Technical Discussion
  >> Linux Issues


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | [4] | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User prlzx
(committed) Fri 18-Mar-11 00:52:59
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: camieabz] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by camieabz:
FAT32 on 32-bit has a 2GB filesize limit (FAT32 limit).
NTFS on 32-bit has a 4GB filesize limit (it's the 32-bit limit rather than NTFS here).
NTFS on 64-bit is something like 8Eib or 16Eib iirc.


nope smile

FAT32 file size limit is 4GB on almost any OS
NTFS file size limit is not 4GB (unless the partition or disk is only 4GB)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ntfs#Limitations

The filesystem structures determine the file size limits, not the OS.

However Windows did have some artificial limit on how big a FAT32 partition you could create at least in the GUI.
In which case you can use partitioning tools like GParted and newer (typically run from CD).



prompt $P - Invalid drive specification - Abort, Retry, Fail? $G
prlzx on n e w n e t Max ADSL

Edited by prlzx (Fri 18-Mar-11 00:55:18)

Standard User camieabz
(legend) Fri 18-Mar-11 01:06:52
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: prlzx] [link to this post]
 
Yup. I'm mixing my addessing with my file systems.

Suffice it to say, with 32-bit I hit the 4GB memory problem, and with a swapfile of 2-3GB and a gfx card of 1GB...uh oh!

~~~~~~~~~~



© Camieabz 2002-2011 - All rights and lefts reserved.

report this link
Standard User GeeTee
(member) Fri 18-Mar-11 01:45:19
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: camieabz] [link to this post]
 
Urban Terror
http://www.urbanterror.info/news/home/

Fills up my (few) idle hours. Old school FPS but hideously addictive.

As for running windows games... you'll need to dual-boot to windows - even the best VM solution will never perform well enough for high end games. Most games will run in a VM given enough tweaking to the VM environment but it's not worth the effort, virtualised graphics drivers will always be problematic.


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User GeeTee
(member) Fri 18-Mar-11 02:23:12
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: camieabz] [link to this post]
 
It's come a long way since then.

15 years ago I dabbled in SCO and whatever Unix version Motorola was peddling on its boxes... all command line stuff.

10 years ago I dabbled with RedHat's offerings - took many weeks of late nights to get to a usable desktop. The choice then was KDE and Gnome - the same dichotomy goes on today.

Now... for my daily desktop... Ubuntu 10.04... installed up and running within an hour including all hardware drivers n.b. nVidia is better supported in Linux than ATI.

The desktop experience is endlessly configurable... you want multi desktops? - it can be done. you want windows that drip of the screen when you change app? - it can be done. you want to put app wiindows next to each other and have them stick to each other? - it can be done

The graphical nicities are all there should you want them.
Standard User GeeTee
(member) Fri 18-Mar-11 02:50:32
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: camieabz] [link to this post]
 
In a move from windows to the dark side you will want to consider the difference between FAT/FAT32/NTFS and native *nix filesystems https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LinuxFilesystemsEx...

That is just a starter link - do some googling around "journalling EXT3 risk".

Abrupt power loss can lead to data loss with EXT3. Mitigation is to lower the commit to disk time... which is just a text file edit away and service restart.
Standard User AEP
(fountain of knowledge) Fri 18-Mar-11 07:50:09
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
Not really the place to go into 32- vs 64-bit arguments, but what you say about memory usage is just false. Have you actually studied and analysed 64-bit code? (I've dabbled with 64-bit assembler so I am talking from experience.)

But if you want to start that debate a new thread would be appropriate.
Standard User AEP
(fountain of knowledge) Fri 18-Mar-11 07:57:57
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: prlzx] [link to this post]
 
A slight correction. I/O ports don't share the same address space as memory on x86 processors.

Address extensions help with the memory addressing problem, but if you've got a 64-bit processor why not use the extra width of the CPU registers, and the fact that there are twice as many of them? It's like buying a V12 and then pulling the spark plug leads off 6 of the cylinders.

There's a lot of tosh talked about 64-bit processors.
Standard User AEP
(fountain of knowledge) Fri 18-Mar-11 08:01:26
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
I'm afraid that most of the first part of your post is untrue. But the last paragraph, about file sizes, is true.
Standard User AEP
(fountain of knowledge) Fri 18-Mar-11 08:04:11
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: camieabz] [link to this post]
 
No. A file on a 32-bit NTFS can be much bigger than 4Gb. Ask anyone who plays with large video files.
Standard User camieabz
(legend) Fri 18-Mar-11 09:25:47
Print Post

Re: Considering the dark side - Distro comparison


[re: GeeTee] [link to this post]
 
Redhat!

That's the one we used. It did the job, but like say, it was a bit...just different, and I didn't care for the apps at the time. Based on responses, things have definitely changed. smile

~~~~~~~~~~



© Camieabz 2002-2011 - All rights and lefts reserved.

report this link
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | [4] | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to