hacker.org

WhiteKnight wrote:I just install in a second partition of the hard drive and when it load successfully it just crash and then show the desktop then after 2 minutes it crash and show up Blue Screen. No warning or error message...

Hmm...

Bizarre.

Yeah, that's definitely out of the ordinary.

If you want help, I could give you suggestions.

canine wrote:

WhiteKnight wrote:I just install in a second partition of the hard drive and when it load successfully it just crash and then show the desktop then after 2 minutes it crash and show up Blue Screen. No warning or error message...

Hmm...

Bizarre.

Yeah, that's definitely out of the ordinary.

If you want help, I could give you suggestions.

I would like to have a bit of help.

And your suggestion would be?

WhiteKnight wrote: I would like to have a bit of help.

And your suggestion would be?

Do you know what graphics card you have?

Other system details would be helpful.

canine wrote:

WhiteKnight wrote: I would like to have a bit of help.

And your suggestion would be?

Do you know what graphics card you have?

Other system details would be helpful.

SLI 3 ways with 9800 GeForce

Xeon Quad Cores

4 TB hard drive

Blu Ray device

32 GB of RAM

And Liquid Cooling if that count

That pretty much it and anything else you want me to add?

WhiteKnight wrote: SLI 3 ways with 9800 GeForce

Xeon Quad Cores

4 TB hard drive

Blu Ray device

32 GB of RAM

And Liquid Cooling if that count

That pretty much it and anything else you want me to add?

Wat.

Are you jerking me around? What in the world could you possibly need 32 gb of ram for?

And I'd suggest grabbing the latest release of Ubuntu and trying that out. I hear it it's rather good for noobs. It's supposed to take care of any hairy details.

Fedora does this mostly, but Ubuntu bends over backwards to do it. And since you have an nvidia card, I'd suggest that whatever you use, you get the proprietary graphics driver. I have to hand it to nvidia: they write bangin' drivers for unix systems.

Damn fine drivers.

If you're using fedora, I suggest you do the following: install yumex, install support for for the livna repo, and then grab the nvidia drivers from there.

tl; dr: When you get a GNU/Linux system set up properly, it should run exceedingly well. Very stable, very efficient and all that good stuff. At that point it should almost never crash. Getting it set up properly, however, can range from much easier than a windows install (ubuntu) to holy-fucking-shit-that's-hard (lunar).

canine wrote:

WhiteKnight wrote: SLI 3 ways with 9800 GeForce

Xeon Quad Cores

4 TB hard drive

Blu Ray device

32 GB of RAM

And Liquid Cooling if that count

That pretty much it and anything else you want me to add?

Wat.

Are you jerking me around? What in the world could you possibly need 32 gb of ram for?

And I'd suggest grabbing the latest release of Ubuntu and trying that out. I hear it it's rather good for noobs. It's supposed to take care of any hairy details.

Fedora does this mostly, but Ubuntu bends over backwards to do it. And since you have an nvidia card, I'd suggest that whatever you use, you get the proprietary graphics driver. I have to hand it to nvidia: they write bangin' drivers for unix systems.

Damn fine drivers.

If you're using fedora, I suggest you do the following: install yumex, install support for for the livna repo, and then grab the nvidia drivers from there.

tl; dr: When you get a GNU/Linux system set up properly, it should run exceedingly well. Very stable, very efficient and all that good stuff. At that point it should almost never crash. Getting it set up properly, however, can range from much easier than a windows install (ubuntu) to holy-fucking-shit-that's-hard (lunar).

I'm not joking around, this is pretty much is my computer I'm using. 32 GB RAM is for several virtual PC that I use. And I'll try your suggestion for stability and Ubuntu seems to be missing a lot of tools for terminals so Fedora 9 option still remain the best choice.

WhiteKnight wrote: I'm not joking around, this is pretty much is my computer I'm using. 32 GB RAM is for several virtual PC that I use. And I'll try your suggestion for stability and Ubuntu seems to be missing a lot of tools for terminals so Fedora 9 option still remain the best choice.

Hmm...

What tools would you be missing?

I ask this because I can't imagine that there's anything you can get on fedora that you can't with ubuntu.

Personally, I use fedora and I like fedora, but any GNU/Linux distro should run just about any software that any other can, provided you have access to the source code.

canine wrote:

WhiteKnight wrote: I'm not joking around, this is pretty much is my computer I'm using. 32 GB RAM is for several virtual PC that I use. And I'll try your suggestion for stability and Ubuntu seems to be missing a lot of tools for terminals so Fedora 9 option still remain the best choice.

Hmm...

What tools would you be missing?

I ask this because I can't imagine that there's anything you can get on fedora that you can't with ubuntu.

Personally, I use fedora and I like fedora, but any GNU/Linux distro should run just about any software that any other can, provided you have access to the source code.

Well it just haven't install the tools therefore I don't know all the commands or techniques to install commands so Fedora 9 seems to have it all sorted out.

Good Lord!!! 4TBs?!? 32 GB RAM?!?........... YOU SIR, ARE NOW MY COMPUTING IDOL.

0.Dark.Thought wrote:Good Lord!!! 4TBs?!? 32 GB RAM?!?........... YOU SIR, ARE NOW MY COMPUTING IDOL.

Thank you! And remember Programming is a very good paying job.

When you work there, in no time you'll have better computer than I have.

OMG... 32 GB RAM :)
Well, I'm satisfied on 100% with 256MB RAM and 40GB harddisk. I'm using Slackware, generally in text mode, got httpd, ftpd, mysqld and a lot of other stuff launched all the time, but generally, system doesn't even need to swap.

The_Dark_Avenger wrote:OMG... 32 GB RAM
Well, I'm satisfied on 100% with 256MB RAM and 40GB harddisk. I'm using Slackware, generally in text mode, got httpd, ftpd, mysqld and a lot of other stuff launched all the time, but generally, system doesn't even need to swap.

Slack on, brother!

Some good shit there. As noted previously, I'm running Fedora 9, but on my laptop I've got Slackware.

My first computer ran Slackware and still does, as a webserver/NAT/what-have-you machine.

Good stuff.

re-bump

canine wrote:

Grand_Master wrote:Freeware is great!

Sure, there could be spyware and stuff included. But still, if you use some common sense, there's alot of great freewares out there.
Always be cautionus on the net, but don't be "afraid" for using freeware.

Lots of anti-virus/spyware programs isfreeware, but not open source. That's to prevent crackers for making virus that bypasses the sequrity, by reading the source, I suppose.
That's one thing that can justify closed source.

This does not mean that I dislike open source.

Closed source is terrible for security. Reading the source makes it easy to fix the problem, and with more people wanting to help than hinder, software improves faster when the source is open.

And there is very little good freeware, by virtue of the fact that most closed source is crap due to the inherent crappiness of closed source.

If you think about it, it only takes one idiot wanting to hinder to make viruses that bypass security programs when it's in open source. When it's in closed source, it's more likely that someone who is on the inside does it and you find the culprit. Unless, of course, it somehow gets leaked or decompiled.

Well that is true in some ways about open source but at the same time. When a vulnerability is found in something like Windows and it takes way too long to get a patch out, the Users have to sit there twiddling their thumbs until Microsoft fixes their product. At least with open source one is able to see exactly what the program is doing and if they find a vulnerability they can patch it themselves quick.

Of course though he side had it's high points and down falls.