chrishoffman at August 22nd, 2013 06:40 — #1
Originally published at: http://www.howtogeek.com/170870/5-ways-to-run-linux-software-on-windows/
Linux users often want to run Windows software on Linux, but Windows users may want to run Linux software, too. Whether you’re looking for a better development environment or powerful command-line tools, you can run Linux software without leaving Windows.
campbell2644 at August 22nd, 2013 11:18 — #2
Experimenting with Linux very often leads to users switching to it for their main OS. There are lots of other Linux distros apart from Ubuntu.
nsdcars5 at August 22nd, 2013 11:23 — #3
Cygwin rocks. Simply using it as my main terminal app increases my productivity a lot.
themike at August 22nd, 2013 13:40 — #5
running linux in virtualbox while i figured out how it worked was a good learning experience and saved me the trouble of dual booting. after a while, i automatically went to virtualbox when i logged into windows. now i run windows inside virtualbox with KDE as my operating system.
vitrbjorn at August 22nd, 2013 14:05 — #6
I found that a simple dual boot setup is the answer for me. Actually I am in Wolfe Linux more than in Windows XP, Vista or 7.
dongateley at August 22nd, 2013 17:17 — #7
A great article that has yet to be written would tell why you would want to do this other than geek appeal. A list and review of Unix/Linux apps that are unavailable in Windows either directly or functionally and of high utility would do the job.
themike at August 22nd, 2013 19:53 — #8
thats a good idea to have a comparison list. everything i've used on windows, i've found an equal to if not better than replacement. not always but most of the time.
dongateley at August 22nd, 2013 20:34 — #9
Yes, that has been my experience too with the huge exception of shells, scripting and command line utilities, a need which Cygwin fills beautifully. I am by no means naive with Unix either and installed Ubuntu in VirtualBox but beyond the fun of just doing that and getting some fundamental stuff installed, there it languishes. I'd love to find some good reasons to actually use it.
gooplusplus_248 at August 23rd, 2013 12:52 — #10
Yes, dual-booting (or tri-booting / quad-booting) Windows plus Linux is common and routine for many, including myself.
Another less permanent option is to try out different Linux versions before installing by using a small multiboot USB flash drive. Two recent Linux USB collections are:
Fix error in the setup file [color=blue]Click-THIS.cmd[/color] near bottom (line 131 or 133).
Make the change below to allow "addon" distros to be added to USB.
[color=red][b]OLD: [/b][/color] for %%d in ( [color=red]..[/color]addon-*.exe ) do ( set /a c+=1
[color=green][b]NEW: [/b][/color] for %%d in ( addon-*.exe ) do ( set /a c+=1
gooplusplus_248 at August 23rd, 2013 13:35 — #11
For our British How-To-Geekers, your high court has decided to block and censor many of the most popular bittorrent web sites where legitimate free software is available for downloading.
One Linux bittorrent site that is (so far) not blocked is TuxDistro.com
The Tuxdistro bittorrent links for the USB multiboot "mini" and "meteor" Linux collections:
mini -- http://www.tuxdistro.com/torrents-details.php?id=1748meteor -- http://www.tuxdistro.com/torrents-details.php?id=1750
themike at August 23rd, 2013 18:42 — #12
i never understood the reason behind booting more than one operating system other than to say "i dual-boot" or "triple-boot" which sounds kidiotic and not all that impressive. i've had up to 5 operating systems installed on virtualbox booting from either windows or linux. if i wasn't satisfied with the o/s i just deleted it from virtual box. no boot managers interacting, no messes to clean up...
jcnewsline at August 23rd, 2013 23:53 — #13
Oh you user-experience-hater you!! There's always folks who will do it 'cause they CAN, regardless of the perceived/real/useless value of the activity. So puhleeese don't shatter anyones' dreams. lol
But it's a seriously good idea, hope someone does this.
Perhaps somebody could also tell me why I NEED to change back to Linux after being a windows user since ver 2.0, then using Mint for nearly three years, then going back to Windows 'cause I couldn't get external USB HDDs and networking working properly - ever! Yet they all work absolutely-bloomingly-well with the same hardware on XP, 7 and 8.
[Now let's hear that Linuxer yell.]
nsdcars5 at August 24th, 2013 12:05 — #14
I stopped using Linux cause it gave me two hours of battery life on my six-cell battery. I expect something closer to 4-5 hours.
gooplusplus_248 at August 24th, 2013 18:22 — #15
That would be unusual. Most modern Linux distros are far more CPU and memory frugal than Windows. Especially resource frugal are the lightweight Linux distros that employ the faster and more efficient desktop environments such as Openbox rather than the more common KDE, GNOME, or UNITY..
You will find several lightweight Linux distros in these USB collections:
nsdcars5 at August 25th, 2013 04:52 — #16
My problem is that it keeps using all four of my laptop cores at all times, unlike Windows, which uses a maximum of two cores at a time, unless I run a game or something.
robynsveil at August 25th, 2013 06:50 — #17
Some Windows software that uses hardware acceleration (like Smith-Micro's Poser Pro 201x) needs to run in bare-metal Windows... VirtualBox hardware acceleration just doesn't cut it.
themike at August 25th, 2013 12:23 — #18
that's just the reason i have a windows 7 ssd with all my software installed on it. never know when i'll have to go back to it, but it's there if i need it
gooplusplus_248 at August 25th, 2013 16:27 — #19
From a quick "linux cpu core usage battery" search, you might try:
from Linux terminal: echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_mc_power_savings
You may also be able (as root) to shutdown the 3rd and 4th cores like this (untested):
echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/online
echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
nsdcars5 at August 26th, 2013 10:59 — #20
That'll probably turn off the cores completely. I still want them, but only when I need them.
And then there's the fact that our home printer works only with Windows. I'm much better off using Arch in a VM.
gooplusplus_248 at August 26th, 2013 11:17 — #21
Yes, it would turn off the cores completely but it should be easy to write a shell script to toggle them on and off interactively as needed.
BTW, have you tried Arch Manjaro 0.8.7 using the Openbox Desktop Environment? If you like a more minimalist but still friendly approach, it is quite nice.
next page →