Linux SuSE 8.2 Pro on my Canterwood system

[pointreyes]

I decided to post here first instead of ABX because this is bleedinEdge. :)

Linux SuSE 8.2 Professional is my favorite rpm-based distro and it happens to be one of the recommended distros by Intel to use with HT-based procs.

What took the most time was getting the PRO1000 NIC to work (CSA LAN). But I'm posting this so yes I got it to work. :)

Compared to my AMD dually, SuSE is much faster on this Canterwood system. Much faster.

I ran top and sure enough SuSE 'sees' two processors.

Let me know if you want me to do a review and exactly what should I review. I have no idea what tests to run in SuSE to see how well Linux does in comparsion to Windows with a Canterwood.

[pointreyes]

Well I have to say forget it with SuSE. It did the Red Hat thing to me. "I own your computer" thing. It wiped out my Windows XP and w2k3 ES partitions. :sad: I will be sending SuSE a 'friendly' letter to tell them what I think about this. :rolleyes: Fortunately my OSes were backed up on my samba server. :) I'm saying forget with SuSE on the Canterwood because I decided to install the SATA drive on the ICH5R-Intel has not released Linux drivers for this controller yet (and they did say they would).

[SubZero]

Did you ever try connectix or vmware? They have some great virtual machine software that will let you fiddle with any OS without the risk of loosing anything but the single Virtual OS file. It will let you run almost any OS inside your existing windows installation (or even within a linux OS).

;)

[pointreyes]

Originally posted by SubZero
Did you ever try connectix or vmware? They have some great virtual machine software that will let you fiddle with any OS without the risk of loosing anything but the single Virtual OS file. It will let you run almost any OS inside your existing windows installation (or even within a linux OS).

;)

I'm aware of these very expensive software packages. I instead use image backup software to protect my data. Plus my file server is never used for multi-OSes so my data is always protected from the risk of lost data. Even though I had OSes wiped-out, nothing was lost. Since I have four machines I even have less of a reason to consider software like vmware. BTW: It's very expensive for me because I also use server OSes so the the 4-digit price tag is a little to much for me to swallow-I would rather just build another computer. :p :)

[SubZero]

Hi PR, nice to see you are back from your vacation! ;) Looks like you have some reading to to on abx...

Yeah, the software is pretty expensive and a little too expensive for private use. Still nice to play with though!

[pointreyes]

Yeah, I have been rather busy reading up on the all the new stuff at ABX. I might be doing more like Yoda and work on the sidelines. I have a massive amount of software coding/learning I need to go through. :( I actually found the book that I thought did not exist (found it at the Seaside Outlet mall), read over 400 pages of that 800 pages book. And that does not include the other books I read that were not technological.

I like vmware and that is the main software package I recommend to people that are in need of using two OSes on the same 'puter at the same time. It's also one of the few pieces of software that validates a reason for purchasing more RAM. :p :D

[SubZero]

Hehe... so true about the extra memory.. 1 gb in my sytem and that's not enought with some serious vmware use.

I may even join you in the sideline club! ;) Doing a number of MCSE IT courses in a month or so...