Main > Linux
Anybody running Linux on their cab?
JoyMonkey:
I know pretty much nothing about Linux, but I did try out about 10 different 'Live CDs' over the weekend (trying to recover data from an XP laptop that shlt the bed) and I found it a pretty good way of testing out the different distros.
I thought Slax was really nice (though I think its not installable on hard drive), it's based on the Slackware distro. It's simple and user friendly. When you're used to Windows a lot of these live cds can seem alien, but I was able to find some kind of file manager thingy and copy the needed files from the XP hard drive over to a usb drive without any problems with Slax.
screaming:
Howard: In general I agree with your opinion, however, for the sake of impartiality I'd like to add to your remarks.
--- Quote from: Howard_Casto on February 07, 2006, 07:49:55 am ---Linux takes longer to starup and shutdown than windows does.
--- End quote ---
Windows XP does a pretty good job of keeping up with Linux boot times. However, it's a lot easier to trim down the kernel to be exactly what you need (and nothing more) in Linux than it is in Windows. Can you even do that in Windows?
For Linux, I'm talking about compiling in the drivers you need for your hardware, and since people don't tend to add/remove hardware from thier cabinet once it's built, this is generally a one-time-only affair (even though it's a PITA).
That's how you speed up your boot time. Unused services can be add/removed from Linux and Windows with equal complexity.
--- Quote from: Howard_Casto on February 07, 2006, 07:49:55 am ---Linux has a handful of emulators while windows has dozens.
--- End quote ---
Not an issue unless you need to run anything Linux doesn't support, though there really are a decent amount of emulators that run on Linux.
--- Quote from: Howard_Casto on February 07, 2006, 07:49:55 am ---Linux has 3 front-ends. Windows has more than you can count.
--- End quote ---
Again, not an issue unless you need something that's not supported. The few front ends that are out there are perfect for the people who use them.
This isn't a Linux vs. Windows thread, like you said, and I have no intention of it becoming one. I'm remaining as factual as possible in this post. Feel free to reply, but I will probably not respond to try and keep it that way.
-Steve.
SirPoonga:
--- Quote from: chemame on February 07, 2006, 07:27:57 am ---So... the million dollar question... apart from simple user preference regarding desktops etc, is there really any difference anyone should care about when it come to running mame on linux? My gut feeling was no, but I suppose there could be a disto that's known for better drivers, etc. Suse was a 5 CD set, Fedora was only 3, and I notice Suse seems to recognize hardware a tiny bit better (or maybe my imagination).
--- End quote ---
For mame, no, it doesn't make a difference. For usage yes. I prefer rpms since I started out on redhat. Actually I first started on debian but moved to redhat when someone bought me a commercial version. Anyway, I've always liked the ease of rpms, though I am sure by now the other packaging systems have caught up to rpm.
The difference with distros is what is bundled with them. Linux is linux. Meaning when people say linux they are usually referring to the core operating system, which is the same across all distributions. What goes into the linux core is up to Linus Torvalds for the most part.
I will agree, somewhat, that windows is better for an arcade cabinet. However, if ALL you are going to do is mame then it's fine. If oyu want to branch out into other emulation with a slick frontend to handle it all then go with windows.
I want to know what howard means by support apps.
As for the other comments, it depends on what you are doing. Linux, in general, is faster at booting than windows, but you can fine tune both until either takes little time to boot. If oyu are using a PC monitor then advance video configuration isn't as big of a problem. TV out can be a problem. Arcade monitor is a bigger problem.
All in all, though, windows is better for an arcade cabinet. Linux does a much better job at being a server than being a desktop or gaming platform. Linux is getting better as a dektop but it still has a good distance to cover.
Actually, the desktop part isn't really linux's responsibility, it's up to xwindows.
whammoed:
--- Quote from: Howard_Casto on February 07, 2006, 07:49:55 am ---
Contrary to popular belief, if you are running a guied version of linux and mame (which is necessary) you'll get the same performance as running the same version of mame on the same pc in windows.
--- End quote ---
What do you mean by guied version of linux?
I run advmame from the console (command line)
I have run tests with linux and windows xp on the same computer and got better performance out of the linux setup with mame. YMMV
--- Quote from: Howard_Casto on February 07, 2006, 07:49:55 am ---Linux takes longer to starup and shutdown than windows does.
--- End quote ---
I see faster boots with linux than with windows xp on the same machine, but its not that much different.
And as far as shutting down, I simply hit the power switch. Can't get any faster than that. (I notice a faster shutdown when actually shutting down too)
Disclaimer: I really don't know if its "OK" to simply cut the power to a linux setup. I read someone said you can if you are using a journalling file system... If the hard drive gets corrupt I'll simply reinstall, I have everything backed up anyway. I'd consider doing the same thing in windows btw.
Anyway to answer the topic, yep I run linux and here are the main reasons I chose it:
1.To run advmame with an arcade monitor on recent hardware with a wide range of video card choices
2. advmame in linux supports multiple mice devices and I had 3 I wanted to keep seperate.
I like advmenu as a front end and only wanted to use it for mame so in my situation running any other os would have been a compromise of some kind.
To answer you're questions about it being easy, It certainly wasn't windows easy. There was a learning curve for sure doing a custom install of gentoo. There may be easier routes? For me, it was part of the fun to learn something new though.
Grasshopper:
With regards to booting times, has anyone noticed that XP actually cheats? You see what appears to be a fully loaded GUI long before it is actually usable.
There are at least two major positives to Linux. Firstly it is free (IMHO this alone more than compensates for any of the negatives mentioned) and secondly it is much more customisable than Windows. The fact that Howard specifically mentions a GUIed version of Linux for running MAME demonstrates how little he knows about the OS. One of the things that annoys me about the design of Windows is the fact that it cannot be disengaged from its GUI.
Another really great thing about Linux is that it is a UNIX clone. UNIX is an incredibly elegant operating system that has stood the test of time. And unlike Windows it was written by programmers for programmers.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version