Dual booting may be a necessary evil, or perhaps a good thing?

Travis Roy travis at scootz.net
Fri Jan 28 12:05:01 EST 2005


I agree..

Removing windows entirely from the presario was not an option. It was a 
machine in my work office for any customer to use. The Linux boot would 
have been specifically for me for doing network testing and whatnot.

My laptop dual boots for various PITA windows only things (specifically, 
our new backup server -REQUIRES- IE to log into it and create new backup 
shares, we have opened this as a "bug" trouble ticket with the company)

At home I dual boot for games (Counter-Strike/HalfLife).

> Re:  The HP thread
> 
> Sure, it would be nice to erase all traces of
> Microsoft from your PC.  But in my case, I migrated
> from two perfectly good, networked Windows XP
> machines.  I wanted to get up to speed in Linux, but I
> still needed my Windows apps for a while (until I
> converted).
> 
> I considered buying a separate computer for Linux but
> rejected it because I felt it would be an unnecessary
> cost.  I opted for dual booting, and I now happily
> have two XP/Fedora dual booted networked machines.  I
> share files and printers between Windows and Linux and
> can run either at will.
> 
> There are some caveats, such as converting NTFS
> partitions to FAT32, and you need to be careful about
> disk partitioning, but I saved a ton of money through
> the dual booting route, and learned a lot in the
> process.
> 
> In fact, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea for HP,
> Dell, or whomoever, to offer a dual boot option.  Or
> perhaps, given your experience, this may be asking too
> much.
> 
> Ira
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> gnhlug-discuss mailing list
> gnhlug-discuss at mail.gnhlug.org
> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss




More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list