Computer Science Canada :: View topic - Switching to linux

Computer Science Canada

Switching to linux

Author:	md [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:01 am ]
Post subject:	Switching to linux
Ok... so I'm not going to go all the way because I do so enjoy BF:1942 and BF:V, but I'm going to try and go back to using linux for my everyday stuff So here are my problems: Picasa2 - use it lots, anyone know of a good replacement? ATI remote - I think I can figure this one out; tvtime looks to have a decent guide Outlook - I tried evolution and it worked ok... anyone know of anything else that's similar? MSN - normally Iuse gaim, so no problem there; but webcams... I need to be able to use those MSVC++ (2003) - yeah, I know that there are lots of other tools, but I really like the integrated debugger, something that I've not been able to find on linux; any ideas? And last but not least... anyone have a good way of getting dual monitors w/ hardware acceleration at least one of them? Either using both outputs of the ATI card, or the ATI card and a second card... if I can't have my dual monitors and have hardware on at least one of them... no linux [edit] oh, writing to ntfs would be nice too; but as the "official" drivers only half support it... is there a not-quite-so free way of doing it, or even a hack to allow you to?

Author:	Notoroge [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:26 am ]
Post subject:
Picasa -- No idea. You could try running it on Cedega (And all your games while you're at it. There's no reason why they shouldn't work). ATI Remote -- Official drivers should support all that fancy stuff Outlook -- Evolution is pretty much the exact same thing. There's also Kmail; don't like it as much though. MSN -- You could try aMSN too. If you have the drivers for your Webcam, there should be no problems. MVC++ -- <a href="http://www.trolltech.com/">Qt</a>? And as for the dual-head setup, I got my 9200 running with full hardware support. I get about 3000FPS on it, which is good. I also have a Radeon 7000 PCI card hooked up as well. That one has no official drivers, but the Open-Source ones let me out-put video to the TV on it, which is all I use it for so I'm good there. I think you need anything higher than a 8500+ card to have official ATI Driver support. And for NTFS, no dice. Either reinstall Windows as FAT32, or you can only have read access to the NTFS. Writing is way too experimental thus far. Maybe in the near future. Update: Why not use Mozilla Thunderbird instead of Outlook? Rofl, don't know why I didn't think about that before.

Author:	md [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:40 am ]
Post subject:
I use msvc++ only for the IDE... not the graphics stuff; what little graphics I do is usually with DirectX (well... directdraw...), however methinks I'm going to start learning some OpenGL. As for thunderbird; while firefox is awesome, thunderbird just sucks. Care to give me a guide as to how you got dual monitors working? I've tried many a time and I could never get it to work properly; and by properly I mean at 1280x1024 on each monitor...

Author:	betaflye [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:43 am ]
Post subject:
Seriously DON'T WRITE TO NTFS FILESYTEMS WITH LINUX!!!! It's possible to do with a hack/work around, but it cannot change the length of NTFS files and you're likely to mess up NTFS if you do so. Reading NTFS is fine, but don't attempt to write to it, you will likely destroy your NTFS filesystem. See the FAQ: http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/info/ntfs.html

Author:	Notoroge [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:
I think we got that point accross already, betaflye. Cornflake, the OS detected and installed the drivers for my 7000 right out of the box. Then I just setup the ATI drvers for the 9200, and setup the xorg-config file to run two congruent displays.

Author:	md [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 2:11 pm ]
Post subject:
I know that the official drivers can only change the file... anyways I can live without writing to ntfs. I also really like WMP because of it's media library, anything similar for linux? I'm thinking I'll probably move most of my files over and as I free up space on the windows partition expand the linux partition; that or I'll send most of it over to my server and put hte rest on cds and just start from scratch

Author:	md [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 2:28 pm ]
Post subject:
Notoroge wrote: I think we got that point accross already, betaflye. Cornflake, the OS detected and installed the drivers for my 7000 right out of the box. Then I just setup the ATI drvers for the 9200, and setup the xorg-config file to run two congruent displays. What are you using? I really like gentoo so that's what I'll be using... and there really isn't much automatic stuff there... Ah well; back to ye olde google

Author:	Notoroge [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 3:45 pm ]
Post subject:
XMMS for audio, and Mplayer for video. It has the most massive codec library I've ever seen. If Mplayer (with all the codec packs installed) can't play it, you've got one currupted file. <a href="http://www.ubuntulinux.com">Ubuntu Linux</a>. Update: Media Library? Is that anything like organizing files in iTunes? I remember there was something like that. I think Totem does that kind of stuff. Don't recall though.

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:28 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Outlook - I tried evolution and it worked ok... anyone know of anything else that's similar? Quote: As for thunderbird; while firefox is awesome, thunderbird just sucks. Anything at all is better than Outlook . Just use plain old (not really) Mozilla Mail, its great. Notoroge, is the 9200 a lot better than the 7000? I have an old 7000 and I know someone who is buying a laptop with a 9200, just wanted to see the differences.

Author:	md [ Mon Jul 11, 2005 7:42 pm ]
Post subject:
9200 is WAY better then the 7000; I've used both a 7000 and a 9000 (which is < 9200) and the 7000 is a joke card; good as a secondary pci card maybe, but thats about it. As for the rest... I'm gonna have to stick with windows for a short while (simply because I don't have the time for an install) but I'll check it all out and see what I can get

Author:	1of42 [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 2:33 pm ]
Post subject:
Cornflake wrote: 9200 is WAY better then the 7000; I've used both a 7000 and a 9000 (which is < 9200) and the 7000 is a joke card; good as a secondary pci card maybe, but thats about it. I would have to say the 9200 is only good as a backup card as well... I wouldn't be caught dead with todays gaming scene running a rig with anything lower than a 9600 SE.

Author:	Notoroge [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 2:47 pm ]
Post subject:
Really? I play Doom3 quite enjoyably on the 9200. And that game is, arguably, one of the most graphic intensive games there is. Games like CS: Source are a joke to run on this card. For big games like that, it's all about RAM and processing power. You don't really need a massive card. A 9200 would do. Update: But then again, if you're going to be using Linux. You're probably not a big gamer anyways.

Author:	1of42 [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 4:32 pm ]
Post subject:
Notoroge wrote: Really? I play Doom3 quite enjoyably on the 9200. And that game is, arguably, one of the most graphic intensive games there is. Games like CS: Source are a joke to run on this card. For big games like that, it's all about RAM and processing power. You don't really need a massive card. A 9200 would do. Update: But then again, if you're going to be using Linux. You're probably not a big gamer anyways. Well, I suppose it could be put this way: For people who like to have their graphics on medium-high settings, a 9200 would not even be under consideration. Obviuosly, you can make most games run on anything if you turn the settings down enough - I saw a guy who got Far Cry working on a 7000 IGP. And yeah, Linux, generally != gaming. Part of the reason I don't use it (much).

Author:	Notoroge [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:
Who said anything about low quality settings? I run everything on max. I have 2GBs of RAM and 3GHz AMD 64. I get no bad performance.

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:04 pm ]
Post subject:
1of42 wrote: Obviuosly, you can make most games run on anything if you turn the settings down enough - I saw a guy who got Far Cry working on a 7000 IGP. And yeah, Linux, generally != gaming. Part of the reason I don't use it (much). Well, I tried running FarCry on my 7000 and it didn't run at all. Lowest settings and everything. Well, the game I have in mind is only semi-requiring AND it runs well on linux . Notoroge, I think you exagerrated just a bit there. Doom 3 would not run really well on a 9200, no matter what CPU/Ram you had. I ran it on lowest imaginable settings on my 7000 - the menu was at around 4fps. This was on a p4 2.2Ghz 512RAM.

Author:	Notoroge [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:43 pm ]
Post subject:
Yeah, but that's a 7000. This is a 9200. Which despite not being the latest X900 (or whatever), it can run Doom 3 quite well at max everything.

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:50 pm ]
Post subject:
Well, despite not ever having used a 9200 (to my knowledge), I have heard that it and the 7000 are not so far apart. Sure they are so many numbers apart, but performance-wise, they are not. Of course it's going to be quite a bit better, but not 7000 compared to 9200 per se (or whatever). I'm sorry if I highly doubt you about the last point .

Author:	Notoroge [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:54 pm ]
Post subject:
The 7000 can't even play Quake III. And the 9200 gives me 65FPS at max quality while playing Doom 3. (OR 125 FPS while playing quake because I capped it. It could do up to 500FPS in Quake III Arena [that I know of, probably more]. I capped it at 500 and works. Will try it at a higher FPS later).

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 7:00 pm ]
Post subject:
Well, I'll keep that in mind, and I'll just have to wait and test it out for myself... Quote: The 7000 can't even play Quake III. sigh Oh yes it can, mighty well.

Author:	Notoroge [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 7:17 pm ]
Post subject:
Try running Quake III on a 7000 at max everything and watch your FPS drop to 20 - 30.

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 7:33 pm ]
Post subject:
Well, sadly my 7000 is on a shelf and Quake 3 was deleted about a month after getting it (got it with the video card). Still, I remember that I had it on high (not highest, but somewhere up there) settings and it ran really smoothly (don't remember fps). Besides, even if, 30 fps isn't that bad... Come on, too high expectations .

Author:	Notoroge [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 7:36 pm ]
Post subject:
I play on 65 for Doom III. So that's just about where I figure it's still playable. But anyways, set Quake to 1600x1200 on Quake III on that card and watch your PC fry.

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 7:43 pm ]
Post subject:
Bah! I mean, I don't really have to worry about fps anymore, but usually anything above 40 is good for me. Yea, 1600*1200, of course, but dang... I still can't believe that with your 9200 you ran Doom3 at 60+fps while actually playing the game with the highest settings. I just can't.

Author:	Notoroge [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 7:58 pm ]
Post subject:
[Gandalf] wrote: I still can't believe that with your 9200 you ran Doom3 at 60+fps while actually playing the game with the highest settings. I just can't. I Can't Believe It's Not Butter!

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 8:39 pm ]
Post subject:
Although I guess it doesn't matter..?

Author:	lyam_kaskade [ Tue Jul 12, 2005 8:48 pm ]
Post subject:
I still can't believe it's not butter! Ah Family Guy... No, probably doesn't matter. Maybe we should all have a big LAN party and then we can show each other. \|\| V \|\| V But then again, maybe not...

Author:	1of42 [ Wed Jul 13, 2005 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:
Notoroge wrote: I play on 65 for Doom III. So that's just about where I figure it's still playable. But anyways, set Quake to 1600x1200 on Quake III on that card and watch your PC fry. I find it difficult to believe you have Doom 3 on max settings at a high resolution and still managed to get fpss that good, especially on an old ATI card, which is worse at the game. What's your AA at?

Author:	Notoroge [ Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:23 pm ]
Post subject:
1of42 wrote: Notoroge wrote: I play on 65 for Doom III. So that's just about where I figure it's still playable. But anyways, set Quake to 1600x1200 on Quake III on that card and watch your PC fry. I find it difficult to believe you have Doom 3 on max settings at a high resolution and still managed to get fpss that good, especially on an old ATI card, which is worse at the game. What's your AA at? Disabled it in CCC. But in-game all settings are at max.

Author:	1of42 [ Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:25 pm ]
Post subject:
Notoroge wrote: Disabled it in CCC. But in-game all settings are at max. Hmm.. resolution? Something's gotta give, I mean, AAs a big one, but everything at max... I dunno.

Author:	Notoroge [ Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:26 pm ]
Post subject:
1of42 wrote: Notoroge wrote: Disabled it in CCC. But in-game all settings are at max. Hmm.. resolution? Something's gotta give, I mean, AAs a big one, but everything at max... I dunno. 1280x1024

Author:	1of42 [ Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:38 pm ]
Post subject:
Wow... I'm not even sure I knew that it was possible to do so well with such bad gfx...

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:56 pm ]
Post subject:
Ok, we have to clear something up since you can just override any settings that the game makes by setting up some external program that controls everything directly. Do you have every setting to the max, or is that just what the games says? Still, that's a really demanding game, and even on some moderately low settings I don't believe it would run too smoothly.

Author:	Notoroge [ Wed Jul 13, 2005 7:53 pm ]
Post subject:
sigh, I just turned Anti-Aliasing off because that's pretty much the only thing this card can't handle. But other than that, it's max-quality all the way. ALL the way. Maybe it's not such a bad card after-all. Turning anti-aliasing off doesn't make games look horrible. And I bet you I can just turn it back on and set the resolution to 1024x768 to compensate.

Author:	1of42 [ Fri Jul 15, 2005 6:58 pm ]
Post subject:
Notoroge wrote: sigh, I just turned Anti-Aliasing off because that's pretty much the only thing this card can't handle. But other than that, it's max-quality all the way. ALL the way. Maybe it's not such a bad card after-all. Turning anti-aliasing off doesn't make games look horrible. And I bet you I can just turn it back on and set the resolution to 1024x768 to compensate. There's gotta be something you're missing. Honestly. The 9200 doesn't even RUN the UT2004 (!!) benchmarks most sites do now. They don't even bother. There's NO WAY you are running Doom 3 on high settings. I mean, if you truly are, and it's not resetting it or something, then wow... but I dunno.

Author:	Notoroge [ Fri Jul 15, 2005 9:32 pm ]
Post subject:
I'm not. And I can play UT2K4 just fine now that you mention it.

Author:	[Gandalf] [ Fri Jul 15, 2005 10:01 pm ]
Post subject:
sigh I have no idea if that is possible, but I think I'll just wait and see for myself in a few months. You're saying that with the 9200, on a 3ghz? 1gbram? you are running doom3 with high, if not highest settings? Well, I'll try it out - but if the new computer blows up, you're at fault Are you SURE that it's a 9200? It would be pretty bad if we had this long conversation and you suddenly said "no wait, its really a 9800" or something.

Author:	Notoroge [ Fri Jul 15, 2005 10:26 pm ]
Post subject:
No, it's a 9200. And it's 2GHz of RAM.

Author:	md [ Sat Jul 16, 2005 12:11 am ]
Post subject:
2GB of ram you mean? or a 2 GHZ cpu... Eitherway it's a lot; but then half of the problem with games is memory, so as long as you have enough then it's all good. Although personally I have 1.2GB and I've never run out (I have a system monitor running all teh time on monitor #2)

Author:	Notoroge [ Sat Jul 16, 2005 12:36 am ]
Post subject:
Whoops. 2GBs of RAM. 3GHz CPU. Update: I thought I already mentioned that.

Author:	1of42 [ Sat Jul 16, 2005 1:05 pm ]
Post subject:
Notoroge wrote: I'm not. And I can play UT2K4 just fine now that you mention it. Ooh, you play 2k4? Wow, rarity of rarities What's ur name ingame? It'd be fun to have a game sometime...

:

You can syndicate this boards posts using the file backend.php or view the topic map using sitemap.php.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy