[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Installing Windows and Linux On the Same Computer here

[bigdav1178]

How does the author completely sideline the traditional method of installing Linux as a dual-boot configuration? - It is the only configuration that actually allows the OS to operate directly with the PC's hardware, and would give the best results performance-wise. I will admit that each option has its own merits and disadvantages (and dual-boot is probably the most confusing for a novice), but at least offer them all.

[jontehenri]

Dualbooting by crating 3 partitions is the best way in the long run. One windows partition (ex. 50 GB) and one for linux (20 GB, doesnt need as much as windows) and the rest as harddrive where you store everything. Partitioning is a bit scary though if doing it for the fist time but be sure to backup everything before you go. The major advantage when having a separate partition fpr linux is that you can do a fresh install of any linux distro on it when you want to try something new or have messed up your configs beyond repair.

[ChiHoKo]

I think using the traditional method is better. I tried Wubi before and I couldn't access files that is on the Windows side. For me, its pretty easy to install.

[MICHAEL6gvz]

Windows users, this is one way to try out Linux easily.
You've got nothing to lose. You can satisfy your curiosity and maybe learn something along the way.


For the rest of the users... this is the simple approach for Windows users to take. We know the best method is a full install or dual boot. Most computer users cannot comprehend what "dual boot" means, so this method makes Linux look like another program. I guess its better to get people to try Linux like this, than not at all.

It can however limit the performance and leave a sour taste in the user's mouth as to what Linux can do.

I forgot all about WUBI, its nice someone keeps it alive.

[bigdav1178]

MICHAEL6gvz, on 12 April 2012 - 08:02 AM, said:

Windows users, this is one way to try out Linux easily.
You've got nothing to lose. You can satisfy your curiosity and maybe learn something along the way.


For the rest of the users... this is the simple approach for Windows users to take. We know the best method is a full install or dual boot. Most computer users cannot comprehend what "dual boot" means, so this method makes Linux look like another program. I guess its better to get people to try Linux like this, than not at all.

It can however limit the performance and leave a sour taste in the user's mouth as to what Linux can do.

I forgot all about WUBI, its nice someone keeps it alive.

I agree that the options presented are intended to be a simplistic approach to trying out Linux, but I think it's important to also mention the traditional dual-boot method. Depending on the CD/DVD drive, Windows installation or virtual machine setup, the user could come away with a very poorly performing Linux installation. I've seen it run so poorly, that if I hadn't known what I should expect out of the Linux install, I wouldn't have given it another thought, and uninstalled. The simple install methods allow the newbie to experience Linux, but depending on how well/badly it performs, it could be enough for the user to never try it again.

The author isn't doing Linux any favors if the user has a messy Windows installation and they try installing inside Windows: the user comes away seeing Linux running even worse than their slow Windows does, not knowing it could be much better if it was installed differently.

This post has been edited by bigdav1178: 12 April 2012 - 08:53 AM

[MichaelPfeiffer]

It seems so obvious...
I installed Ubuntu on a separate partition and used the Ubuntu partition-er during the install.
Windows is still there, but it can't boot. If only this article was out 3 months ago...

[Ferniez]

I have dual booted Linux/Windows on various machines and all have been easy and effective. The approach used here is very safe but it will not really give you a solid feel for Ubuntu. Ubuntu in particular can auto detect Windows and automatically set up the partition so that both will work via a menu on start up. For those that are afraid of subjecting their mainline systems to the risk of a wayward installation one approach might be to try it on an old Windows machine that is no longer in mainline use. This is the way I learned and ended up installing and reinstalling many different versions of Linux on the test machine. This helped me to learn to trust Linux and in particular the Ubuntu installation process.

For those that are still fearful then another approach would be to find a friendly Linux user who has done this and can serve as a guide. In any case the goal should be to do a real installation that would include partitions and all. The advantage to this approach is that the two systems co-exist via a Grub Menu and the user can choose to boot natively into one or the other.

In my experience with dual booting I found myself increasing my Ubuntu use as I became a more practised Linux user. Eventually, I learned that I didn't really need Windows for much. Now I rarely use Windows at all. Dual booting is a great way to learn Linux while having the convenience of Windows if and when it is really needed. For most things I like the virus and malware free Linux environment, not to mention the freedom to copy and distribute my Linux programs to friends, family and students.

[PASystems]

jontehenri, on 12 April 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

Dualbooting by crating 3 partitions is the best way in the long run. One windows partition (ex. 50 GB) and one for linux (20 GB, doesnt need as much as windows) and the rest as harddrive where you store everything. Partitioning is a bit scary though if doing it for the fist time but be sure to backup everything before you go. The major advantage when having a separate partition fpr linux is that you can do a fresh install of any linux distro on it when you want to try something new or have messed up your configs beyond repair.

I made the attempt at Linux first with a Wubi install. As the writer notes, there is some performance issues and also access issues. Then I tried the traditional dual boot install. I'm no novice when it comes to dual boot installs having performed them with various windows installs. However the Linux install put the grub loader(Linux Boot Manager) in fine but my boot into Ubuntu Linux has problems seemingly to do with video resolution. Unfortunately to fix it requires going into the text based recovery console and entering a whole complicated series of commands. It's not very user friendly to diagnose a problem with a faulty Linux install. The only positive aspect is that now my Windows install works better on boot than it did before. Yet maybe I shouldn't jinx myself on Friday the thirteenth. Any suggestions as to an easier way to correct my Linux boot problem? Should I try another reinstall of Ubuntu?

[paleolith]

For Windows users: forget about UBUNTU. Install ZORIN. The learning front-end-load is negligble.

[scorp]

Your best bet to installing any distro of linux in dual boot with windows is on a 2nd hard drive then your partitioning becomes a lot easier & safer until such point you become competent with partitioning,to decide what version a vm is a good way to go if you have ram to spare & a 64bit computer,you can practice partitioning safely,if not then live it is,distrowatch has the lists of what's out there with screenshots.Member paleolith recommends zorin,i too use it however unlike ubuntu it is no where near as stable & breaks easily,a shame really it's such a nice GUI

[MichaelBurrington]

First of all - If you want to try Linux for the first time, Ubuntu may not be the best choice for newcomers. It's getting better, but there are more user friendly versions (such as LMDE, LinuxMint main, Kubuntu, PCLinuxOS). I've been using various Linux versions, including Ubuntu, for several years and I find it confusing to navigate around the newest Ubuntu.

Secondly - If you just want to poke around in Linux for the first time, you are better off using a Live CD or USB as you mentioned, rather than installing within Windows. The performance in a virtual machine within Windows (at least on my computer) took a huge performance hit and really doesn't give a good impression of Linux.

But the best way to test out Linux is to buy a cheap harddrive and install it on that, rather than messing with partitions. You can get a small mechanical harddrive or a 60GB SSD drive for about $55. This lets you use all of the files on the Windows drive without creating shared folders and contiously swapping files around. Not to mention that the boot up time will just blow you away on a SSD!

[beast2k]

paleolith, on 13 April 2012 - 06:49 AM, said:

For Windows users: forget about UBUNTU. Install ZORIN. The learning front-end-load is negligble.

NO! that is one distro that has missed the point of Linux completely. Currently the best option for linux beginners is kubuntu. Ubuntus new "unity" interface is just going to confuse new users and marks the beginning of then end for that distro. Kubuntu is still based on Ubuntu and is easy to set up. If Zorin was free I may agree with you but paying for a "ultimate edition" sends the wrong message about linux.

[CharlesNorrievno0]

Why bother? Ubuntu does it all faster faster and much much better,

Oh iTunes? Can't you live without it. One day Apple will cave in like the rest of the world and give us what we want, Ubuntu.

[catilley1092]

MICHAEL6gvz, on 12 April 2012 - 08:02 AM, said:

Windows users, this is one way to try out Linux easily.
You've got nothing to lose. You can satisfy your curiosity and maybe learn something along the way.


For the rest of the users... this is the simple approach for Windows users to take. We know the best method is a full install or dual boot. Most computer users cannot comprehend what "dual boot" means, so this method makes Linux look like another program. I guess its better to get people to try Linux like this, than not at all.

It can however limit the performance and leave a sour taste in the user's mouth as to what Linux can do.

I forgot all about WUBI, its nice someone keeps it alive.

Yes, one does have a LOT to lose. The first time that I tried Ubuntu via Wubi, I installed some cleaning tool within Ubuntu. One was "Computer Janitor". It wiped out my boot option for XP Pro, but could still boot into Ubuntu. Figure that one out, although Ubuntu was running inside of XP, I couldn't access XP any longer.

This was 3 years ago, & that was the lesson that taught me to backup my computer. So my advice to anyone who wants to take Ubuntu for a spin this way, backup your computer.

Cat

[billyroyff1q]

good article

[nickrudd1]

Does this work on Linux Mint and Zorin as well.

[bobc4012]

bigdav1178, on 12 April 2012 - 07:18 AM, said:

How does the author completely sideline the traditional method of installing Linux as a dual-boot configuration? - It is the only configuration that actually allows the OS to operate directly with the PC's hardware, and would give the best results performance-wise. I will admit that each option has its own merits and disadvantages (and dual-boot is probably the most confusing for a novice), but at least offer them all.

While an experienced user can handle a dual-boot situation, most newbies can't. Also, considering you want to introduce a newbie to Linux, the article is perfect for doing such in a non-frightening way. It doesn't take much for an inexperienced person to mess up the MBR, partition tables and the like because they misinterpreted some cryptic instruction. Granted, she could have mentioned dual-booting at the end of the article for those familiar with the technique, but it is unnecessary as an experienced user would already know that - case in point are the posts like yours. BTW, I have run Ubuntu all three ways - a Wubi install, a VirtualBox install and dual-booting. When browsing the internet, using "Windows apps" that run under WINE (e.g., Notepad++)and a few others. I never noticed any noticable performance degradation except in one instance - I had done a Wubi install of a 18GB Ubuntu 10.10 into a 20GB partition. It created one virtual disk rather than the 3 disks I would get with earlier releases. Because of fragmentation, it did affect performance on some applications. BTW, I noticed in a lter post, someone used "Computer Janitor and messed up the XP boot process. I'm not sure what they did, but Computer Janitor should not have done that. Also, I would not recommend Computer Janitor as a means for clean-up. I had my own problems with it on a lap-top dedicated only to Ubuntu (10.04). I would recommend Ubuntu Tweak. Prior to 11.04, it was straight-forward in its use. The new Unity I/F (crapola IMO) may have caused it to make some changes (were they really needed?). As far as Unity, it represents a preview of Windows 8.

[MLStrand56]

Why all this talk of different Partitions for each OS? HD's are cheap enough today, that it seems that the Best way to dual boot, is to use completely different HD's for each OS.

MLStrand56

[bobc4012]

paleolith, on 13 April 2012 - 06:49 AM, said:

For Windows users: forget about UBUNTU. Install ZORIN. The learning front-end-load is negligble.

Zorin is Ubuntu based. I downloaded and installed it in VirtualBox and, while it has some neat features (e.g., making the "Start" button look like XP Start, Win. 7 Start or Ubuntu is a nice touch). The Ubuntu mode sets up the menus like Ubuntu 10.10 and earlier, which I like (and am used to seeing). I'd recommend it, in spite of the hour plus download time (1.1GB download) - you can purchase a DVD for around $13 (I may be a little off). I'd also recommend downloading 10.04 (and/or 10.10) before Canonical drops it at the end of the month when 12.04 LTS hits the fan (although some claim the Unity I/F has been vastly improved). For the Linux Mint users and others who do not like the Unity I/F, try XFCE desktop or the Gnome Classic. While the LXDE and the Lubuntu desktops aren't bad, they are still different, likewise the KDE desktops ( Plasma and Openbox).