How Long Does it Take You to Tweak a New Box? 463
An anonymous reader asks: "When you get a new computer, how long does it take to make it 'home'? On a Windows system, there seem to be a huge number of preferences I have to choose before it is really comfortable (doing things like: installing software; changing the wallpaper and color schemes; start menu layout; and so forth). How long do you have to fiddle with computer until you have it set up the way you like? Do you use any shortcuts to speed up the process?"
On linux... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Windows: 6 hours from install to just having the current updates.
Any more funny jokes?
Re: (Score:2)
OK, so you're happy with the absolute defaults that come from an apt-get (or equivalent). Good for you.
But if that really is the case, then surely that makes you unusual, no? Isn't the whole point of this fun little project called linux that we've all jumped on board is that you can spend a lifetime tweaking this bit and that to make it just right?
As for me, I'd definitely need my
Re:On linux... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:On linux... (Score:5, Informative)
Once that was setup, all I had to do was copy it over to my Linux server and turn on/off a couple of services that I needed on my server but not on my laptop. I mean *literally* just copied the root partition.
It then ran perfectly with all my user and
When I wanted to set up another machine, I used the same root image and only had to edit a small handfull of files to change the machine name/IP address and to change a couple of passswords.
When I upgrade to another machine, all I will need to do is copy (or even just physically move) my hard-disks.
With Windoze, because of the dang registry, you can't just copy or move disks without corrupting everything. Also, since customization is done through menus and stored in obscure parts of the registry, you can't just copy over and/or edit individual config files. Instead, you need to reinstall each application individually and then individually run the program and customize the options by going through endless menus.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
LOL
The correct answer was that the authors of NT realized the ever-expanding and slow-to-process INI arrangement in earlier, simpler versions of Windows was doomed to failure. T
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:On linux... (Score:4, Informative)
>>they created it in the FIRST place was because Bill
>>Gates et al thought their third-rate operating system was so special and important
>>that to protect it from nasty "pirates" they had
>>to essentially lobotomize it.
>Um, no, not quite
Oh, I disagree.
Consider these related points:
1. All other commercially available operating systems use flat files to store configuration information. And almost every other operating system out there works better than Windows in a variety of ways, not least of which being performance.
2. Operating systems that use flat files to store configuration information are trivially easy to back up. They're also trivially easy to clone and distribute.
3. People who run operating systems that use flat files tend to READ those flat files. The registry, on the other hand, is so huge and byzantine (again, WHY???) that finding entries in it is like going on a fishing expedition. Nobody really knows what's in their registry. I believe this is by design, not by accident.
4. The registry is IN FACT used to make piracy difficult. Virtually every piece of commercial Windows software stores registration information in the registry, usually in literally dozens of different locations so that to clear out a botched install you have to use a search tool and guess at all the possible names the company may have used for its keys. First, do you think Microsoft isn't doing the same thing??? Second, do you think this isn't by design???
5. When a hacker creates a Word Macro Virus and the cops catch him like, a week later, how do you think that happens? Word, installed, puts serial number information in the registry and later, into documents. Again, by design.
6. When they spent millions of dollars building Windows 95 and created long filename support, do you think it was by mistake that they just happened to leave long filename support out of their new version of DOS? Or that you couldn't boot to a command prompt that had long filename support? Again, it was to make piracy difficult. At the time, you couldn't boot to a CD. You had to use a floppy. Live CDs didn't even exist. And there was NO WAY to boot with a floppy and get long filename support. So where before you could use pkzip to zip up your whole windows and dos directory and back up your system to about twenty floppies, with Windows 95 you were basically hosed. Even if you DID zip up all the directories, when you unzipped them during the restore process they'd look like "Progra~1" instead of "Program Files" and you'd be hosed.
IF YOU ARE CORRECT, you must have a reasonable justification for the use of the registry that is credibly better than using a flat-file approach. I bet you don't have one.
Re:On linux... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ya know why CLSID is such a large part of the registry? It has nothing to do with preventing piracy.
Ya know how CurrentControlSet is so thorough, and how it's off on it's own branch of HKLM? Yeah, if you were to replace all of those values with the correct values for the machine that you were moving to (primarily system driver and hardware reference information) then you could in theory just boot windows back up without ever having a glitch. Theory though, not practice. The theory is sound because MS designed the registry to be modular. It's not their fault that other companies don't respect the sandboxing that MS set up, and it's hard for them to enforce that people play nice, but look at the strides they've made via their IDEs (which is where most people write the said crappy software) and
Most of the problems that people have with drivers or program interoperability stem from those two registry branches anyways, is another good reason why all IT folks should be able to recite the major points of the registry, as well as knowing all the places where windows looks when it goes to start the various functions.
This is one of the few shortcomings I can find with the registry, but it's not the fault of MS as a whole, but rather the failure of different groups to consolidate on one storage location for important settings. Then again, two of the reasons why there were so many different locations where settings may have been in the flat files were for security through obfuscation and because sometimes the maximum size you could read on a flat file could have been exceeded due to the number of settings that you might want, so MS designers purposely chose to store info in multiple places, such as the load differences between system.ini and win.ini.
So I've been going in this direction to come back to, the registry didn't have anything to do with limiting piracy, if anything, it's the reason why so many people want to run Windows, even if they don't want to pay for it. The real thing that seems to be annoying to so many geeks is the oobe libs.
Need I go further?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Hmm... OSX would be one to disagree with you there (netinfo [wikipedia.org] is not in flat files and neither is LDAP). OSX does have flat files on the BSD end but they aren't the ones you configure with the gui. The os that used netinfo before OSX was NeXTSTEP and everyone thought it w
Re: (Score:2)
I can install potato on blank media and upgrade to sid in about three or four hours depending on network transfer rates. Over the years I've managed to whittle the time it takes to restore all of my preferred system configurations from the next two or three days to the next two or three hours. Most of that process is comprised of installing and test using the applications which remind me of the greatest number of things which
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Kinda like how OS X will do import of your settings/home directory from another comptuer over firewire. Just boot your old computer with 'T' held down and Setup will copy all
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So yes, of course it does have the ""shortest "initial setup time"".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Definitely gotta have my .vimrc too. It's followed me for a long time.
What I do is keep sort of a manifest-slash-backup-script of my important stuff. I never want to backup my entire home dir because directories like ~/.kde can produce some very undesirable results when restoring it. So I just keep a script like:
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
(you forgot to include sarcasm tags in your message)
Re:On linux... (Score:5, Funny)
Connect a fresh Windows ME box to the net and you can get all that in 1 minute and 45 seconds.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently you can do that on Windows Me in 1.45 seconds.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
And if it takes you 6 hours to do updates, WTF are you using, RC1 on a P120? I install XP frequently (I do a lot of side work), and I use a stock XP SP2 disk, figure on an hour, maybe 1.5 at the outside, for downloads, I tweak it while those are running... I can have a fully set up and updated XP box inside of 3 hours... 1.5 if
Re:On linux... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:On linux... (Score:4, Interesting)
*point to 3rd line*
I can have a fully set up and updated XP box inside of 3 hours... 1.5 if I use a slipstream disk.
I know none of us RTFA, but can we at least RTFC?
In all seriousness, I was relating to the most standard method of XP installs, which is "put the disc in, install, then do a few hundred megs of updates". When I'm looking for speed in my installs, yeah, I can use a slipstream disk, hell, I'll make a HD image if I'm doing a multi-station rollout.
The parent poster, however, was comparing a freshly-downloaded Linux ISO, which is already patched, with an XP install that required updates to be downloaded, and then complaining about the difference in speed. Yes, it's entirely possible to make an XP install zip right along... slipstream in updates, even program installs and configs, and you can be done in a comparable timeframe to a linux distro. I'm all for fair comparisons. The parent poster, however, wasn't making a fair comparison, and I was pointing out that flaw in his argument.
Karma profit! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:On linux... (Score:5, Funny)
OS X - Tweaks for about 1-2 hours and spending about $600 on extra applications
Linux - Change desktop background. Done.
Re:On linux... (Score:5, Informative)
Contrast that to the last new Windows machine (XP) I bought, when I had to move everything by hand, reset everything by hand, and spent about a week reinstalling each and every application I used... by hand.
With or without the trial of Norton Antivirus...? (Score:3, Insightful)
Is that with or without the trial of Norton Antivirus on the disk...?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I wasn't about to pay for a file manager either. Window shading is the same deal. There's WindowShade X, but jeez, why do I need to spend money for this thing really? I've just learned to
Re:On linux... (Score:4, Funny)
"When Vista comes out of beta it will have the same features as my Linux/Xorg box has for the last several years."
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I keep finding things to continue tweaking it. Earlier this year Flash 9 is out. For my kids, just last month the MTP lib came out so they can sync their Zen player. I just found a decent replacement for my stage light console program and I'm just now getting it compiled and installed (Q-Light).
Not bad as a nubie since I first installed Ubuntu when Dapper came out.
One to two weeks... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Mounted Home (Score:5, Informative)
Personally (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
All together, there are only 2 icons that get to call my desktop home, Recycled and dropbox. I'm thinking about remove recycled.
Then I go find a desktop background that's not a corporate endorseme
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Personally (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Weeks. (Score:4, Informative)
It's never over with (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's never over with (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The only real shortcut.... (Score:5, Informative)
Also, how the heck did this one make it through the filters? Who the heck cares how long it takes people to set up their system? Although I will brag that I can assemble a new box in under 10 minutes without troubleshooting.
Norton Ghost? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Norton Ghost? (Score:5, Insightful)
Let it evolve (Score:5, Interesting)
20 minutes (Score:4, Informative)
- copy old
- "debconf-get-selections" on old computer and pipe to "debconf-set-selections" on new one
- "dpkg -l |grep ^ii" on old computer and replicate the package list
- go drink some tea while the apt-get proceeds
- done!
I carried my home dir with its settings across about three or four new computers in the last eight years or so, and I didn't have to tweak things very much. Only upgrading major components require some maintenance, but other than that, it's simple.
Re:20 minutes (Score:5, Informative)
dpkg --get-selections > packages.txt on old machine,
then do:
dpkg --set-selections packages.txt on new machine,
then do:
apt-get dselect-upgrade on new machine.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That's particularly annoying when the program depends on the particular hw (eg xorg.conf) because I can't copy a config from another box.
Another thing that makes me lose time is downloading the latest stable kernel sources from kernel.org, changing the default config, compiling, installing and troubleshooting the
Home (Score:5, Informative)
Classic-ize windows display settings
Give the system an enema (remove all the windows default crap, any ads or OEM-given crap)
Install the necessities (ad-aware, avg, firefox, powertools, other windows registry hax)
Install a few benchmark things and test (diablo 2, doom, zsnes, media player classic + fddshow)
Dump data from old backup. (Over my last 3 installs this was via diskettes, then CDrs, then DVDrs). Then over the next week I'll just install new stuff as needed. Winamp, AIM, mud client -- I save all these executables but by the time you do a reinstall they're outdated anyway.
On linux... (Score:2)
On windows, I can never get that "home" feeling. Mostly because of the select-to-copy/middle-click-to-paste idea hasn't been "innovated" yet on windows.
Re: (Score:2)
I just had to replace my hard-drive (Score:2)
I spent about a week or so writing some simple programs(bmp to transparent gif converter, hex editor) and adding a few registry hacks to make them context menu accessible. I'd imagine my case is a bit different from the normal person's, but for me it's about where I want it in a week.
Re: (Score:2)
On a Mac: 4 hours... (Score:2)
Install X11
Download and install development tools
Download and install subversion
Download and install firefox & opera
Find the Office disks, install and update office.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're setting up a Mac and you already have one Mac, try the firewire upgrade option. It will copy over all your data, applications, X11, updates, dev tools, MS Office, security certs, etc. while you go get lunch. It is so much easier than, well, anything else I've used.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
1st hit:
http://metissian.com/projects/macosx/subversion/ [metissian.com]
Nice installer:
http://metissian.com/downloads/macosx/subversion/s ubversion-client-1.3.1.dmg [metissian.com]
Not long. (Score:2)
Put "Favorite Distro of the year" into CD tray and do a default install with my partitioning scheme (1-2 hours).
Do the security patch routine (30 minutes)
Change mouse behaviour to "Focus follows mouse" (2 minutes)
Change panel behaviour in KDE to 'auto hide' (30 sek)
Re:Not long. (Score:5, Funny)
So you're the degenerate pervert using this. Damn you! Damn you to hell!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For laptops or any non-multi screen system it's the only way to go.
When I'm using windows it's the biggest thing I miss. There's a power tool that allows you to set it up, but many windows apps behave badly without the click to focus behavior.
Depends on how cute she is, or how drunk I am.. (Score:3, Funny)
badump ching
Re: (Score:2)
Parent post is too funny to be "troll" IMO.
3 days (Score:5, Funny)
Re:3 days (Score:4, Informative)
Of course, unless you're inflicting pain on the penguin, but given my own installation experience I think you're the one getting the pain... and apparently enjoying it.
OS X Plus Firewire (Score:5, Informative)
You boot the old computer in Firewire mode by holding down a key. You plug in a firewire cable to the new computer. You click the install from old computer button. You go get some coffee and a bagel.
So basically, it takes me about 60 seconds and it takes the computer an hour or so. That includes pulling over my Windows and Linux desktop installs within a VM. Seriously, this is one of the main reasons OS X is my base workstation OS instead of Linux. Who wants to waste a bunch of time manually copying things over, only to find not all of it works anyway and you still have to reinstall a few things and tweak a few more?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This is on of the reasons I changed to Macs after 8 years on SuSE Linux. It being a BSD of sorts also helped my decision
When I replaced the iMacG5 with a MacBook Pro I did as you mentioned and everything was exactly the same, down to the position of the files on my desktop and all settings, installed apps, etc. etc. It was pure paradise.
Only difference was that I made a latte with a splosh of whiskey and some brown sugar instead of coffee+bagel.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You can go one better; just clone your one standard machine, and save the disk image. That way if you have two machines (laptop and desktop, for instance, or loaner while one's in the shop), you can just put
2 days (Score:2)
Hey, it's still quicker than Windows took.
Two years . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Location of files vs GUI (Score:2)
About 5 minutes (Score:2)
I have a high turn-over rate within my set of machines in common use. In the past 7 years I've owned about 9 distinct machines.
Some time ago I began exploring my options for rapid deployment of, as you put it, "home". First off I began minimizing the number of packages I have installed, and of those I do actually use I can rapidly recall and install with ease via aptitude. Anything I forget is either unimportan
Not long with a reference (Score:2)
Never, except with Linux (Score:2)
In Linux, I usually get sick of trying to figure out how to get a program to work/run properly, and give up.
Windows Update (Score:5, Informative)
I have reinstalled XP a few times, from an SP1 disc. Visit Windows Update. It can't Update until I install some ActiveX stuff so I can use the latest version of the site. That done, it recommends maybe 50 or 60 updates. Reboot. Go back to the site, spend a half hour downloading SP2 and another 2 installing it. Reboot. Go back to the site. More updates, maybe only a dozen this time. Reboot. IE7. Reboot. Patch for IE7. Possibly a couple of driver updates. Reboot.
And if you leave to go to the store without accepting the EULA for the patch....more wasted time. And this whole process is just to secure the machine, no app install of setup or tweaking.
Vista seems slightly better in this regard as it can download updates during the install process, but it still isn't up to the level that most Linux distros are.
I don't even know what the OSX install process looks like, or if there even is one. And I own more Macs than anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No no. Download the SP2 update on another machine and burn it on to a CD.
Yank the network cable. Install XP from your install media (SP1). Insert SP2 disc and run the update from there. You are
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, one thing they do to avoid being complete pricks is roll all the security updates and bug fixes into the latest point upgrade so you only download that instead of every single update since 2001. If you connect Mac OS X Tiger 10.4.0 to Software Update, you're going to get a Mac OS X Tiger 10.4.9 update, probably an AirPort and Quicktime update, an iTunes update, and updates for wh
On a mac.... (Score:2)
Wrote a script ... (Score:2)
It copies some skeleton and data files from a NFS share, and uses these to edit a bunch of config files if needed (it also detects if it's needed, and leaves things alone if not. And backups are kept of the files in case it makes a mistake.)
Things updated include: /etc/hosts /etc/passwd /etc/shadow /etc/group /etc/syslog.conf /etc/inittab /etc/mail/submit.cf /etc/mail/sendmail.cf /etc/auto.master /etc/e
what I do... (Score:2)
install the 3 or 4 system heavy utilities I'm using now
(wow, studio, ms publisher/office currently)
and stick my old box under the desk and connect to it via MSTSC (remote desktop)
then I share it's hard drives completely open.
New PC is used only for trusted, normal, I can type the domain by memory websites.
some blogs, slashdot, news sites, and google summary/cache searches only.
anything I want to 'download and try' I do it to the old pc.. under remote desktop...without drives connected
Why don't you (Score:2)
Back in the day... (Score:2)
Everything is at $HOME (Score:2)
I simply tweak /etc/fstab, /etc/passwd and /etc/groups to use my NFS and NIS exports of users and home dirs. That means, I add 2 lines to the first (to handle email too) and one to each of the other files...
When the server dies (already happened) I simple exchange the hardware, and keep the disks (sometimes I have to insert a new module into the kernel, but it is rare). When a disk die I'll have to restore backpus. That takes time.
I run slackware (Score:2)
Xbox? (Score:2)
Well, the xbox 360 really only takes a couple minutes. Get your HD video settings, clock, and Xbox live setup and you hit the ground running.
Windows, on the other hand, takes at least a couple weeks. Even after creating a unattended install disc. Just too many little settings to change here and there.
Linux (Fedora), took me about 6 months, but I am somewhat a Linux novice, and I spend less time on my linux box. For a basic web or file server, it doesn't take long, but for an everyday PC, it does tak
About 6 hours (Score:2)
Which OS? (Score:2)
For Windows, it takes about half an hour to get to the point that I no longer feel unclean for using the machine. This includes turning off pretty much all the eye-candy, stripping the system of the most common bloatware, and disabling as many MS apps as possible. But the process never truly ends. Months later, I will try to find a file and end up seeing th
with suse, it takes me ... (Score:2)
the actual configuration after a clean install is done in about 15 seconds, thanks to dhcp/nis/automounter... the _only_ setting i have to tweak is to make the dhcp client send a release packet before quitting on shutdown.
On Windows (Score:5, Informative)
At this point, you have a usable machine. If it's my machine (and even if it isn't my machine), I usually install the following software:
Schwab
Still... (Score:3, Funny)
Debian. (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm still customizing it. There are a lot of tweaks that make my pc more productive, lots of scripts I've written over the years.
About 15 seconds (Score:2, Interesting)
cd dotfiles
make
Forever. EV. VER. (Score:3, Funny)
(That's a big benefit of a laptop: it's not always sitting around with the sides off and wires streaming out to nearby electronics, coz I can't *do* that with a laptop. I'm definitely the computer equivalent of the guy in high school who never had the hood on his car. He had the coolest car... but he was also the only person who *needed* the fire extinguisher under the passenger's seat.)
not too long ... linux user (Score:3, Informative)
Desktops: not much more than 'cd
Re: (Score:2)
That's for my home system, though - only do that process about once a year. At work, taking a workstation from blank to a functional install of XP with the latest patches and Office is about 90 minutes, most of that unattended.
Re:Months here too... (Score:2)
On my lazy temp systems, I have the necessities done in 1-day's-work spread over a week.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Heheh, I love this comment because it is so indicative of the "my OS is better than your OS" that, unfortunately, a small number of Linux users suffer from. Let me restate his build with mine using windows...
his...
1 - install new version of favorite distro (currently Ubuntu)
2 - use package manager to install any additional apps
3 - Use and enjoy!
mine...
1 - Install new version of current stable windows version (right now msce)
2 - Install all additiona
Re: (Score:2)
Even Guild Wars more streamlined patcher takes quite a long time from a fresh install. Since everything is instanced, it seems to patch/decompress areas I visit on the fly, as well as downloading patches in the background while I play.