Main > Linux
Anybody running Linux on their cab?
jan25th:
Hello,
First post though long time lurker. I run a mythtv setup at home
and have (as almost all mythtv users do) an nvidia card.
nvidia has a binary driver that is very stable. I have heard many horror
stories from people trying to get tv-out working with ati cards although I
understand that that may be the preferred way to go in the windows world.
SirPoonga:
Sigh, all these new upstart linux distros. Where did Suse, Slackware, Redhat, and Debian all go :)
chemame:
--- Quote from: SirPoonga on February 06, 2006, 05:53:25 pm ---Sigh, all these new upstart linux distros. Where did Suse, Slackware, Redhat, and Debian all go :)
--- End quote ---
Funny you should say. I just finished upgrading my wife's system to suse 10. She's never seen anything but Windows, so I expected a huge fight. Plus, she had many expectations regarding connectivity to the existing Windows machines in our house (files, printers, vnc, office, etc), so I also expected to have to break it to her gently when some things didn't work. I'm happy to report that with a nearly straight-from-the-CD install, I was able to give her a suse 10 system that does EVERYTHING she's used to, and she even said "wow, it just looks more updated somehow". Anyway, suse is my linux distro of choice. Never seen ubuntu or gentoo or really anything other than fedora (didn't like) and knoppix (not what I'm after).
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).
Okay, I've hijacked this thread long enough. Thoughts?
Chemame
Howard_Casto:
My thought is there isn't any reason to even use linux. :police:
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. So in the positives it's just as fast as windows. And linux is free, that's a positive.
On the negatives:
Linux takes longer to starup and shutdown than windows does.
Linux has very crippled hardware support particularly when it comes to advanced configurations of video cards.
Linux has a handful of emulators while windows has dozens.
Linux has 3 front-ends. Windows has more than you can count.
Linux has zero support apps, windows has several.
You are more likely to get help with a windows based problem in regards to emulation than you will a linux one.
Can't play pc games on linux.
This isn't a windows vs linux thing, it's a common sense thing. Once you get a front-end setup you won't see the os regardless of your choice. But you will see the slow bootups, lack of choices, and fugly front-ends if you choose linux.
Using linux to squeeze a few more fps out of an aging box is a good idea. I should say it would be a good idea if that were actually true. ;)
If you are worried about performance and have an aging system then use dos. It's faster, has a smaller footprint, zero bootup time, and since you were going to be using linux anyway, you'll hardly notice the ugly fe choices you are stuck with.
youki:
Agree with howard.
Despite the fact i like linux , i have to admit windows avoid lot of problems mainly in term of software choice, hardware support.
And considering performance, i agree with howard too. A windows well can be even faster than a linux.
And on old computer. Dos is enough, i think.
Unfortunaly i don't think linux is a good choice for "gaming" in general. Let it to Internet or Database server where it is an excellent OS!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version