Re: OT: Windows is too expensive
 

Ubuntu has all you need to compile seamonkey in the build-essential meta package though there isn't packages for seamonkey itself yet (you have to grab the source from mozilla.org for now). Its going to be hard to find a distribution that won't let you build and use a custom kernel though I'm not sure why you want to. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: OT: Windows is too expensive
 

I am presuming that the kernel in nearly all distributions is also compiled for vanilla 'Pentium' rather than using any exotic instruction that risk compatibility. Many Linux installations are on very old hardware that doesn't have any other uses. I'd like to actually use the fancy capabilities of my hardware. The MMX instructions are now something close to 15 years old. Even SSE is about a decade old now. (And then there is SSE2 and SSE3, but I don't have any processors that handle those... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif ) Also, there might be some services included in the kernel by default that I don't need and don't want for security reasons. It's been a few years but I did tinker with Linux a bit back in the 1.x kernel days. Then, you had to recompile to change quite a few options. Maybe that has been fixed? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: OT: Windows is too expensive
 

For the most part yes the default kernel for a distribution is generic usually coming in 386, 686, k7, 64bit and what have you. I have never seen much improvement in making hardware specific kernels or software in general though many people still do it. If you think compiling for days just to get mild performance increases is what you want to do there are many distributions made around that ideology. I would suggest Gentoo.

One thing is for sure, configuring the kernel is a butt load easier then what you remember. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
Here is a quick run through: Gentoo Handbook

Re: OT: Windows is too expensive
 

Days!? When I had Linux 1.x running on a 40 Mhz 386 it only took an hour and a half or so to recompile the kernel. Has it grown that much that it now needs days to recompile on modern hardware? Or has the optimization performed by the compiler become that arcane and complex?

Anyway, the kernel and the windowing system (when in use) underly all other programs running on the machine. I would expect any improved use of hardware features to have a noticeable effect on system performance.

Re: OT: Windows is too expensive
 

No, compiling the kernel itself is quite fast. But a stage 1 Gentoo install does often take days. Luckily it looks like the handbook is pushing a stage 3 these days.

Re: OT: Windows is too expensive
 

OK, every day I'm getting closer to actually swapping drives & starting to install things. But I am trying to get everything in order. Since I don't have broadband, I need to know "How do you setup a modem in Linux?" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: OT: Windows is too expensive
 

This help? https://help.ubuntu.com/community/DialupModemHowto

Re: Moved to new HD
 

Well, here I am getting used to Windows XP -- only 6 years after everyone else! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif I finally got tired of 'preparing' and just made the switch last night. Any 'personal computer' is a moving target of course. You can never have everything just right. But thanks to all the preparation I am getting programs and data moved over very quickly. But it did keep me up into the wee hours.

In a few more days I expect to finally install Linux on the reserved partition.

Re: Moved to new HD
 

I used Win 98se up to 2002 then I got Win XP pro, I haven't when back [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/MusicalNote.gif[/img]

Re: XP questions
 

Since I am trying to get XP settled before going on to Linux I'll ask some Windows questions here. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

1) Does it do any 'good' to have IE 7 installed -- other than the obvious benefits of (supposedly) better security while browsing? I don't use IE but since it is so highly integrated into the main OS I am wondering if it gives some security benefits in other respects.

2) Exactly what is .NET good for? My copy of Win Xp Home came with .NET 1.1 and I am guessing it was installed by default (How do you tell what version of .NET is installed?) but I don't know what it means for how I use my computer.

3) Why do my XP video drivers offer fewer display modes than the Win98 drivers for the exact same video card?

4) Why is Win98 able to recognize and use an external modem turned on after it boots but XP cannot? I literally had to reboot just to be able to dial out. Deh!