Linux / UNIX Distributions VAIO Laptop Installation...

Main Page | Report this Page

Linux Forum Index » Linux Setup » Linux / UNIX Distributions VAIO Laptop Installation...

Page 1 of 1

Linux / UNIX Distributions VAIO Laptop Installation...

Author

Message

caluinsider at (no spam) gmail.com...

Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:37 pm

Guest

Hello All,

I've been stuck working on Windows based systems for the last several
years due to compatibility issues with proprietary software from work
and on campus. I haven't had a Linux or UNIX box running for quite
some time--Yggdrasil and Slackware with Solaris on my desktop.

If this is not the proper forum to discuss such matters, inform me so
I can get to the right place and get the hell out of your hair.

I recently bought a Sony VAIO running Vista and now that I have two
computers, I decided it was time to get back to my computing roots [I
used to run Minix back in the day].

It was no problem setting up a dual boot for my desktop, however the
situation is not the same for the Sony laptop. The distros have
changed a lot since I was active. I tried running some live CDs
without desirable results. I'm running a Sony VGN-NW125J and I'm
looking for a *IX distro that supports my hardware and my primary
focus is on security and reliability.

I'm open for a power user version of a Linux, BSD or SVR4 variant.
Over the past few years, so much has changed with the distributions
I'm amazed. I'm used to configuring options straight in the config
files, but now it seems that many tools rely on graphical
configuration programs which don't offer advanced options, e.g.
connecting to a wireless network with a hidden SSID on a non-standard
channel with a WPA passcode and changing X resolution and refresh rate
by config files or step-by-step console utilities. Now, most software
wants to configure itself automatically and not present me with the
option that I want.

Any suggestions?

The hardware profile for my laptop is as follows:

Intel Core 2 Duo T6500 at (no spam) 2.10 GHZ
Vista is running in x64 mode. I hate it. Would a *NIX OS be
able to operate in 32 mode? B/C 80% of my
Windows won't run in x64 mode and I don't want that to happen on
Linux.

4 GIG RAM

Intel Mobile 4 Series Express Chipset Display Adapter

And a crappy USB 3.5" Floppy Drive Samsung / HP co-branded Model
SFD-321U which I can't even find a driver for on Windows.

Alec

Please e-mail me at (no spam) cal u insider [at] g mail
[dot] com

The Natural Philosopher...

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:44 am

Guest

caluinsider at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

The only Linuxes I have had exposure to are Redhat 6 (dont larf) and
Debian.

I think a lot depends on what you want to do. Whilst I like Debian, and
gnome - the default desktop - I have found better support from its more
swashbuckling descendant, Ubuntu. and its support groups. This is
usually more up to date kernel and application wise.

I think you need to ask and answer the following questions

- are you a compile everything from source person, and an inveterate
fiddler with the system or just a user?

- do you need the latest and greatest, or will a stable and less
bleeding edge solution serve?

- what do you really want to run on this machine application wise? That
made a lot of difference to me: I hadn't envisaged that I would w3ant ao
much multimedia..but once I realised that I COULD listen to the radio
and watch TV and play videos on mine, suddenly it became important. My
laptop is now the camping holiday TV set, with a TV dongle plugged in.
Brilliant!

- what desktop do you want to use, if any?

Id probably recommend Debian or Ubuntu, but that is not as informed a
recommendation s it should be. Others will for different reasons, advise
differently.

Stefan Patric...

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:41 pm

Guest

On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:37:34 -0700, caluinsider at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

I've been stuck working on Windows based systems for the last several
years due to compatibility issues with proprietary software from work
and on campus. I haven't had a Linux or UNIX box running for quite some
time--Yggdrasil and Slackware with Solaris on my desktop.

If this is not the proper forum to discuss such matters, inform me so I
can get to the right place and get the hell out of your hair.

You're in the right group.

Quote:

I recently bought a Sony VAIO running Vista and now that I have two
computers, I decided it was time to get back to my computing roots [I
used to run Minix back in the day].

It was no problem setting up a dual boot for my desktop, however the
situation is not the same for the Sony laptop. The distros have changed
a lot since I was active. I tried running some live CDs without
desirable results. I'm running a Sony VGN-NW125J and I'm looking for a
*IX distro that supports my hardware and my primary focus is on security
and reliability.

If your notebook is fairly new hardware-wise, Linux might have some
problems. It takes about 6 months or so for "The Community" to add
drivers and such after new hardware is introduced.

Also, Live distros are limited to what they can fit on a single CD. So,
there can be problems. But a standard non-Live install does not have
that limitation.

Quote:

Even with the GUI configuration utilities, underneath, config files are
still plain vanilla text files. So, you don't need to use the GUIs if
you don't want to. The exception in many distros is xorg.conf, the
config file for the X-server: There's not one. The config is set up at
each boot. However, you can create one if you prefer after the initial
install using the commandline X config utility--the name varies depending
on the distro--and the system will use it instead of automatically
creating one at boot time.

Quote:

Any suggestions?

Slackware (http://www.slackware.org/) has always be the most plain
vanilla, Unix-like Linux distro out there.

Quote:

Yes, you can run 32-bit Linux on your 64-bit notebook.

Also, there are no "modes" in Linux. You are either running a 32-bit
distro or a 64-bit one. Remember, Linux isn't Windows. (Even Vista
wasn't Windows. What a piece of crap it was.)

In my opinion, I don't know why you would want to limit yourself to a 32-
bit OS on a 64-bit system. I've been running 64-bit Linux (Fedora Core 6
and Fedora 9) for almost three years now with few problems. Those mainly
being browser plugins that have all been 32-bit. So, I needed to run a
wrapper to use them in a 64-bit browser. But that's much less a problem
now.

Another nice feature of 64-bit Linux is if you install the 32-bit
libraries, you can run 32-bit apps, too, concurrently with 64-bit one, if
your CPU supports 32-bit function call translation. My AMD 64 does. And
I'm sure your Intel Duo does. Initially with FC6, I used this feature to
run a 32-bit browser, so I wouldn't have to "wrap" the plugsin, but with
F9 I didn't have to do this, and just used a 64-bit browser.

Quote:

4 GIG RAM

With 32-bit, the OS will only be able to access about 3.2 GB of that 4 at
a time due to 32-bit addressing limitations.

Quote:

Intel Mobile 4 Series Express Chipset Display Adapter

And a crappy USB 3.5" Floppy Drive Samsung / HP co-branded Model
SFD-321U which I can't even find a driver for on Windows.

Can't help with this one, but since it's a USB device Linux might just
recognize it as a removeable media mass storage device. No additional
driver needed.

Stef

Aragorn...

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:21 pm

Guest

On Thursday 29 October 2009 00:41 in comp.os.linux.setup, somebody
identifying as Stefan Patric wrote...

Quote:

On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:37:34 -0700, caluinsider at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:

I'm open for a power user version of a Linux, BSD or SVR4 variant.
Over the past few years, so much has changed with the distributions
I'm amazed. I'm used to configuring options straight in the config
files, but now it seems that many tools rely on graphical
configuration programs which don't offer advanced options, e.g.
connecting to a wireless network with a hidden SSID on a non-standard
channel with a WPA passcode and changing X resolution and refresh
rate by config files or step-by-step console utilities. Now, most
software wants to configure itself automatically and not present me
with the option that I want.

Even with the GUI configuration utilities, underneath, config files
are still plain vanilla text files. So, you don't need to use the
GUIs if you don't want to. The exception in many distros is
xorg.conf, the config file for the X-server: There's not one. The
config is set up at each boot.

Hmm, no, that is not correct... Distributions that do not supply an
on-disk */etc/X11/xorg.conf* file rely on /hald/ - which is a hardware
abstraction layer daemon - to configure the X server whenever it is
started, but this is not at boot time, this is at X11 start-up time.

You must not forget that X11 runs on top of the GNU/Linux system - or
any other UNIX for that matter - and that just because you have set up
your system to boot up to a display manager - which is typically in
runlevel 5 - doesn't equate this step of configuring X with the boot
process. If your system is set up to boot to runlevel 3, then you will
be presented with a CLI-style login screen - just as on the alternative
virtual consoles - and then X won't get configured until you start it.
It's very similar to how /udev/ works, i.e. /udev/ creates a device
special file for certain hardware when the hardware is plugged in (and
thus detected by the kernel and its information exported to /sysfs/),
not when the machine is booted.

Quote:

However, you can create one if you prefer after the initial install
using the commandline X config utility--the name varies depending on
the distro--and the system will use it instead of automatically
creating one at boot time.

Same comment as above. And by the way, while there are many
distributions that may now go without an /xorg.conf/ file, this is
still not commonplace. I'm running PCLinuxOS 2009.2 - which is a
Mandriva spin-off - on this machine here right now, and it still has
an /xorg.conf,/ albeit that it's not a complete one. For instance,
there are no modelines for the actual resolution I'm using - i.e.
1600x1200 at 85 Hz and 24 bit colordepth - only for a possible TV-out.

Quote:

The hardware profile for my laptop is as follows:

Intel Core 2 Duo T6500 at (no spam) 2.10 GHZ
Vista is running in x64 mode. I hate it. Would a *NIX OS be
able to operate in 32 mode? B/C 80% of my
Windows won't run in x64 mode and I don't want that to happen on
Linux.

Yes, you can run 32-bit Linux on your 64-bit notebook.

Also, there are no "modes" in Linux. You are either running a 32-bit
distro or a 64-bit one. Remember, Linux isn't Windows. (Even Vista
wasn't Windows. What a piece of crap it was.)

Such modes are not operating system-specific but hardware-specific. An
x86-64 processor has two main modes, each with submodes. The two main
modes are 64-bit long mode (with 32-bit compatibility mode as a
submode) and 32-bit legacy mode, with real mode, 16-/32-bit protected
mode and virtual 86 mode as submodes).

All machines with x86 processors - be it 16-bit, 32-bit or 64-bit -
start up with one CPU only - i.e. one core on multicore processor
chips - in real mode, unless these are machines with an EFI BIOS or
LinuxBIOS. The legacy BIOS (and DOS-compatibility) require this. The
legacy BIOS will then load the bootloader - which still runs in real
mode - and the bootloader will load the operating system kernel, which
has some real mode bootstrapping code for setting up the necessary
descriptor tables and switching the processor into protected mode.

And here is where things differ between 32-bit and 64-bit operating
systems. If the kernel is 64-bit, the protected mode will be the
native long mode, and if it's a 32-bit kernel, the protected mode will
be legacy mode.

Quote:

In my opinion, I don't know why you would want to limit yourself to a
32-bit OS on a 64-bit system. I've been running 64-bit Linux (Fedora
Core 6 and Fedora 9) for almost three years now with few problems.
Those mainly being browser plugins that have all been 32-bit. So, I
needed to run a wrapper to use them in a 64-bit browser. But that's
much less a problem now.

Another nice feature of 64-bit Linux is if you install the 32-bit
libraries, you can run 32-bit apps, too, concurrently with 64-bit one,
if your CPU supports 32-bit function call translation. My AMD 64
does. And I'm sure your Intel Duo does.

You've got that backwards again. Smile

All x86-64 processors support
this - remember: 32-bit compatibility mode is a submode of 64-bit long
mode - but not all operating system kernels support it. It is possible
to configure and compile a Linux kernel so that it doesn't support
32-bit compatibility mode. ;-)

Quote:

Initially with FC6, I used this feature to run a 32-bit browser, so I
wouldn't have to "wrap" the plugsin, but with F9 I didn't have to do
this, and just used a 64-bit browser.

That has more to do with the version of the browser and the development
of its plugins than with the version of the underlying operating
system. Wink

Quote:

4 GIG RAM

With 32-bit, the OS will only be able to access about 3.2 GB of that 4
at a time due to 32-bit addressing limitations.

I realize I must sound pedantic here - no hard feelings though - but
this is not entirely correct either. :p First of all, the exact amount
of RAM available on 32-bit systems depends on the amount of PCI devices
in the system. 3.1 GB seems about the minimum, but it could go up as
high as 3.6 or 3.7 GB if you don't have too many PCI devices.

Furthermore, if you have more than 4 GB of physical memory installed and
you are using a 32-bit PAE kernel or a true 64-bit kernel, then some
BIOS versions have a function to remap the address space of the RAM
which gets covered by the PCI address space - i.e. the so-called PCI
memory hole - to a location above the 4 GB barrier, so that it can be
accessed again. However, this requires - as I said - either a 64-bit
kernel or a 32-bit kernel with PAE enabled, which allows it to use up
to 64 GB of RAM.

Now, not all BIOSes have such a "PCI memory hole remapping" function,
but the good news is that you don't need it, because the Linux kernel
can do that as well, and this might actually be the preferred method on
some motherboards. For instance, my Tyan machine has a BIOS which
allows hardware remapping of the RAM obscured by the PCI address space,
but this would negate the usability of ECC. Letting Linux handle the
remapping on the other hand doesn't, because ECC runs in the
processor's "unreal" mode - alias "systems management mode" - which has
access to all of the memory but without using protected mode features.
And thus, when the Linux kernel does the remapping, this is done from
within long/protected mode and nothing needs to be changed to the
address space for "unreal" mode, unlike when you set it up in hardware.

Quote:

Intel Mobile 4 Series Express Chipset Display Adapter

And a crappy USB 3.5" Floppy Drive Samsung / HP co-branded Model
SFD-321U which I can't even find a driver for on Windows.

Can't help with this one, but since it's a USB device Linux might just
recognize it as a removeable media mass storage device. No additional
driver needed.

If it's USB, then most likely it will be supported as such, yes. It
will probably be seen as a partitionless hard disk - not unlike many
USB sticks.

It isn't always obvious as to how those devices are seen. For instance,
I have an Iomega REV 70 GB drive, which is seen both by the kernel and
by the hardware at machine boot time as a USB CD-ROM device, but you
can use it just as if it were a hard disk.

(Well, at least in theory, regarding how you access it. It's not wise
to use those as actual hard disks because then they wear out a lot
faster. They're not made for fulltime usage. Wink

)

--
*Aragorn*
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

John Hasler...

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:20 pm

Guest

Aragorn writes:

Quote:

Distributions that do not supply an on-disk */etc/X11/xorg.conf* file
rely on /hald/ - which is a hardware abstraction layer daemon - to
configure the X server whenever it is started, but this is not at boot
time, this is at X11 start-up time.

The X server figures out for itself anything that isn't specified in
/etc/X11/xorg.conf. It only relies on libhal for hotplug stuff.
--
John Hasler
jhasler at (no spam) newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

Wanna-Be Sys Admin...

Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:48 pm

Guest

caluinsider at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

Hello All,
....

I've installed various Linux dists (RHEL, Fedora, CentOS) and FreeBSD on
the same system (a Sony VAIO laptop), and it was far less powerful than
the one you've outlined. You should be able to install what you want
without problems.
--
Not really a wanna-be, but I don't know everything.

caluinsider at (no spam) gmail.com...

Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 6:34 pm

Guest

Quote:

I think a lot depends on what you want to do. Whilst I like Debian, and
gnome - the default desktop - I have found better support from its more
swashbuckling descendant, Ubuntu. and its support groups. This is
usually more up to date kernel and application wise.

I think you need to ask and answer the following questions

- are you a compile everything from source person, and an inveterate
fiddler with the system or just a user?

- do you need the latest and greatest, or will a stable and less
bleeding edge solution serve?

- what do you really want to run on this machine application wise? That
made a lot of difference to me: I hadn't envisaged that I would w3ant ao
much multimedia..but once I realized that I COULD listen to the radio
and watch TV and play videos on mine, suddenly it became important. My
laptop is now the camping holiday TV set, with a TV dongle plugged in.
Brilliant!

- what desktop do you want to use, if any?

It's been a while since I've used X. I'm not even certain what GUI
interfaces sit on top of the X system.

I like sinking my teeth into config files and finding out how to
optimize [or at least get to work] my applications.

Ideally, I would like my laptop to run a dual or triple boot for
Solaris, Slackware and XP [unless I can figure out a way to bypass the
proprietary program required to log on to my campus' network. I want
to convert my old tower into a dedicated database system running the
most secure UNIX or Linux distro I can find or even building a system
from the kernel up.

I sell books and electronics online and attend college full time
finishing my dual degree in Finance and Economics, but after three
years, I've come to the realization that I am addicted to computers,
troubleshooting, systems administration and the such.

Nico Kadel-Garcia...

Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 4:11 pm

Guest

On Oct 29, 2:48 pm, Wanna-Be Sys Admin <sysad... at (no spam) example.com> wrote:

Quote:

caluinsi... at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:
Hello All,

...

I've installed various Linux dists (RHEL, Fedora, CentOS) and FreeBSD on
the same system (a Sony VAIO laptop), and it was far less powerful than
the one you've outlined. You should be able to install what you want
without problems.

This can be misleading: I've had the fun of getting the components of
various Vaio laptops working, and activating some of their odder
devices such as the scrollbar or touchpads or even weird chipsets for
the modem and network port and graphics have all sometimes been
awkward. It takes a while after many laptop motherboards are released
to get all the kinks worked out. Sony Vaio's are lightweight and
popular, so they're one of the most likely laptops to get all these
features enabled.

Power is not the key: in fact, an older and less powerful laptop is in
many ways *more* likely to be able to work completely, because those
of us who integrate kernel components have an opportunity to debug. (I
count myself as someone who's done so a few times.)

Darren Salt...

Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 5:42 pm

Guest

I demand that John Hasler may or may not have written...

Quote:

Aragorn writes:
Distributions that do not supply an on-disk */etc/X11/xorg.conf* file
rely on /hald/ - which is a hardware abstraction layer daemon - to
configure the X server whenever it is started, but this is not at boot
time, this is at X11 start-up time.

The X server figures out for itself anything that isn't specified in
/etc/X11/xorg.conf. It only relies on libhal for hotplug stuff.

.... and HAL is deprecated, though it'll still be around for a few years yet.
We now have libudev and a GLib wrapper for it, libgudev; and libhal users are
being moved over to one or other of them. (gxine, for example, uses libhal to
display a little information about devices for configuration purposes; I've
got it using libgudev now, though the HAL code is still the default.)

--
| Darren Salt | linux at youmustbejoking | nr. Ashington, | Doon
| using Debian GNU/Linux | or ds ,demon,co,uk | Northumberland | Army
| + Output less CO2 => avoid massive flooding. TIME IS RUNNING OUT *FAST*.

If you're feeling good, don't worry; you'll get over it.

Wanna-Be Sys Admin...

Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:49 pm

Guest

Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

Quote:

On Oct 29, 2:48Â pm, Wanna-Be Sys Admin <sysad... at (no spam) example.com> wrote:
caluinsi... at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:
Hello All,

...

I've installed various Linux dists (RHEL, Fedora, CentOS) and FreeBSD
on the same system (a Sony VAIO laptop), and it was far less powerful
than the one you've outlined. Â You should be able to install what you
want without problems.

This can be misleading: I've had the fun of getting the components of
various Vaio laptops working, and activating some of their odder
devices such as the scrollbar or touchpads or even weird chipsets for
the modem and network port and graphics have all sometimes been
awkward. It takes a while after many laptop motherboards are released
to get all the kinks worked out. Sony Vaio's are lightweight and
popular, so they're one of the most likely laptops to get all these
features enabled.

Power is not the key: in fact, an older and less powerful laptop is in
many ways *more* likely to be able to work completely, because those
of us who integrate kernel components have an opportunity to debug. (I
count myself as someone who's done so a few times.)

To follow up, it's certainly a possibility that I just didn't need or
want to use some features other people might, so I didn't have a
problem, but I primarily just do a basic install and often run
everything in a terminal/shell.
--
Not really a wanna-be, but I don't know everything.

Douglas Mayne...

Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:29 am

Guest

On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:37:34 -0700, caluinsider at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

to encrypt my systems. This is especially true for mobile systems. YMMV.
I use the device-mapper facility of Linux to encrypt root and other
partitions. I have seen several Linux distributions installers which help
you to setup an encrypted partition on LUKS. That makes it easier, but I
prefer to use device mapper directly. YMMV.

Quote:

I'm open for a power user version of a Linux, BSD or SVR4 variant. Over
the past few years, so much has changed with the distributions I'm
amazed. I'm used to configuring options straight in the config files,
but now it seems that many tools rely on graphical configuration
programs which don't offer advanced options, e.g. connecting to a
wireless network with a hidden SSID on a non-standard channel with a WPA
passcode and changing X resolution and refresh rate by config files or
step-by-step console utilities. Now, most software wants to configure
itself automatically and not present me with the option that I want.

Any suggestions?

The hardware profile for my laptop is as follows:

Intel Core 2 Duo T6500 at (no spam) 2.10 GHZ
Vista is running in x64 mode. I hate it. Would a *NIX OS be
able to operate in 32 mode? B/C 80% of my
Windows won't run in x64 mode and I don't want that to happen on
Linux.

4 GIG RAM

Intel Mobile 4 Series Express Chipset Display Adapter

And a crappy USB 3.5" Floppy Drive Samsung / HP co-branded Model
SFD-321U which I can't even find a driver for on Windows.

Alec

Please e-mail me at (no spam) cal u insider [at] g mail [dot]
com

Note: comment inline.

Caveat: I don't have any Sony Vaio computers.

I am surprised that you had trouble setting up Linux on the laptop, and
that you didn't get acceptable results with a live CD. What was wrong with
the live CD?

If you haven't attempted an install, then maybe you should pick a
distribution and see how well the install goes. Slackware's installer has
not changed much, at least during the time that I have used it. There are
also new releases of Ubuntu, Fedora, and OpenSuse (pending in a few days.)
I like Slackware. YMMV. I am running Slackware 12.2 + Dropline Gnome. Here
is a screenshot from a netbook:
http://www.xmission.com/~ddmayne/slackware/ss.2009-09-20.01.png

--
Douglas Mayne

shortT...

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 1:54 pm

Guest

On Oct 28, 2:37 am, "caluinsi... at (no spam) gmail.com" <caluinsi... at (no spam) gmail.com>
wrote:

Quote:

Download and burn an iso of the new Ubuntu live CD.
Boot from it and check to see if video, network, sound etc work.
If they do then install it.

caluinsider at (no spam) gmail.com...

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:31 pm

Guest

---

Quote:

I don't think I've ever gone that far only for the reason that I hate
touchpads. I had a wonderful ChinaPad, the last true model, IMO, that
had any sense of the ThinkPad legacy, an R60 I bought in 2006 or 2007
all top of the line, crammed with a similar configuration to what I'm
running now, only with an x86 processor and costing $1,500 more.
Since the elimination of the cat tongue only design, I've strayed away
from Lenovo. What really got me going was the fact that after
purchasing a next day on site service extended warranty and my
computer started smoking one day [I didn't think they could catch my
bad habits, but A.I. must be advancing], it took nearly two months of
swapping out pretty much every component of the laptop, which sat in
pieces on my kitchen table in the interim, during which I was offered
a full refund. I declined as the model had been discontinued. In the
mean time, I had made friends with the service technician, Chuck, who
told me that he hadn't worked on a single service ticket longer in his
entire 30+ years of employment. Going on 75 days without my $2,500
laptop, it was finally deemed fixed. I was elated that I could get
back to work at college and back on the road. I started typing a ten
page paper when I pushed the laptop a little out of my way so that I
could reach for my drink. Five pages in, the slight jolt of being
moved caused a loose power connection to break contact and resulted in
me losing all my work. I wasn't going to wait another month for a new
power supply and called in to get a refund. I was told no go. It
took a letter to the vice president and two months to obtain a refund,
minus the charge for my warranty.

I ended up using a 300mhz ThinkPad for about a year without one
service outage. It was borrowed, however, and I didn't have the funds
at the time for a decent model, so I used my PDA and BlackBerry 7130
for database applications and did all my work on my home computer for
some time. I couldn't pass the deal up on this VAIO, which Best Buy
price matched to an Internet listing that I'm fairly certain was below
production cost. I still carry a mouse with me wherever I go,
inspiring strange looks from people in classes where the professor
speaks so fast that I have to type notes because I can't keep up if I
write.

Back on subject, however, I would consider myself a power user with a
keen interest in security and I'd like to learn to program and build
and manage servers and databases along with database entry
applications which can parse the input into a variety of output
matrices used by bookselling websites and e-tailers. A nice niche
market exists for small and mid size sellers who would like a common
input application akin to The Art of Books or Fillz, with the
increased functionality to support the merchant's own website along
with custom configurations which by reaching freely available listing
sites reach distinctly different subsets of buyers who have particular
preferences for certain distribution channels. I think a good starter
project for me is doing a financial calculator for my BlackBerry and
taking a database class.

I think I'll go back to Slack. Does anyone on here have a preference
for Solaris or a particular BSD distro? Does anyone here still use or
have access to any commerial UNIX versions? I'd like to build an
older box up to study the different releases I could never afford when
they were popular and readily available? Or terminal accounts still
available online? I'm also interested in getting my hands on a
working VMS system, as our university still runs a number of
campuswide systems on VAXen and those systems still need administered
by people who have experience, but one can't work on them without
having the requisite knowledge.

Thanks for all the input from everyone. I'm also taking donations for
Mini Vax machines, SGI workstations, Crays and PDAs and SDIO
accessories and anything else interesting, if anyone lives close to
Pittsburgh and needs to get rid of some hardware.

Thomas Rates

Page 1 of 1

All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Thu Nov 26, 2009 6:19 am Linux Forum Index