Conversation
Notices
-
@vt3c If you wipe the XP computer to install Ubuntu, the drivers on XP are wiped too. So, if the XP computer, say, has a better processor or memory or stuff like that, choose it and simply wipe it and install Ubuntu yourself. Of course, This is only if your actually choosing between two physically separate computers that have Ubuntu and XP respectively.
Wednesday, 27-Aug-14 13:57:16 UTC from web-
@vt3c XP master race
-
@vt3c Is this because one comes with XP and the other with Ubuntu? If so, look at the XP one again and decide if the laptop is overall better or worse, you can just wipe it and install Ubuntu.
-
@techdisk Couldn't you just make an exact copy of the windows XP install, repartition the drive, put the exact copy back on partition 2, and install Ubuntu on partition 1 ?
-
@critialcloudkicker Yes, but why the heck would you want to keep a broken XP install?
-
@critialcloudkicker Also it would be much easier to repartition the drive first and install Ubuntu to "partition 2", then use GRUB to set "partition 2" as the first to boot.
-
@techdisk Oh, it is broken ? Then just go inside and make a hardbackup of all the .INI and .SYS files regarding the hardware. Just in case your Ubuntu install does not allow you to ( clearly ) make sense of any Hardware ID's and/or installing
-
@techdisk Easier, yes, effective, no
-
@critialcloudkicker I think i'm confused. Are you explaining how to make a dual boot system, or something else?
-
@techdisk I was trying to "explain" that when you make a dual-boot system the one you plan to use the most often should be on the beginning of your HD due to speed. Although in hindsight this might be really REALLY negligible since HD's started to become larger than 2 GB
-
@critialcloudkicker In that case, it is kinda pointless because if you had your drive defragged correctly, all it has to do is seek to the start of the second partition, which literally takes less than a millisecond. it's how all my dual boot machines are set up. Windows on partition 1, Linux distros on partition 2 (or other). (of course, I use Windows a lot more than Linux, so...)
-
@techdisk http://serverfault.com/questions/193698/which-part-of-of-a-hard-drive-has-the-highest-throughput-beginning-or-end-of-dr I am not the only one whom seems to think this way though
-
@techdisk Also, side question, since when are you even remotely allowed to scatter partitions around on the disk ? Well maybe if you were using some sort of dynamic standard, but I recon that the sheer overhead data of what partition is where requires a whole seperate ( abeit smallish ) partition.
-
@critialcloudkicker I'm just saying that the only way it really should affect the speed is if you somehow were able to do that, which I know is impossible. And about your other post, I was just using logic, I don't actually know that much about the drives. But, again, using logic, even if there is a speed difference, it would be absolutely negligible.
-
@techdisk Negligible or not, if I knew I could get a negligible increase in speed by pre-planning a bit more, I'd do it. :)
-
@critialcloudkicker If I had enough space to duplicate entire hard drive partitions, I would probably do it too. Unfortunately, I don't.
-
@techdisk I probably have enough space around here to at best duplicate a 1 TB partition. But I will have to scourge my backup disks for space. What program would you use to do such a thing though ? Or would you just "dd" it ?
-
@critialcloudkicker I actually have no idea. That's the second reason I haven't done it.
-
