Some Linux installations are sometimes not able to see other computers on the local network. The question is why?
As I posted before, if the machine can actually see the other computers, then it can log in, access the Windows shares, and play media files from the NTFS disks. No problems there.
The Brix is a triple boot machine at the moment, so something is still not quite clear there.
I guess the Unix/Windows networking explains the separate "Windows Network" icon, although the Windows computers are also visible without having to go there. That's what I find slightly confusing. I guess it may be useful to filter out any non-Windows devices. Maybe.
The problem here appears to be on-going updates by programers of the user interface.
Frankly I hate this in any OS. Just when I know where everything is, somebody gets a bright idea to change the way things are done in order to glean some expected new wave of popularity.
Simply put, the configuration menus are all migrated into a new scheme. In Debian 8.x, I have the same problem with seeking out the 'tweaks' in the GNOME 'Tweak Tool'. This cute nonsense wasn't present in earlier Debian
There simply is no immunity to programmers getting a brainwave and creating an update just to justify staying on the payroll. Some days, I think I could have lived happily ever after with DOS 3.1, Wordstar, and Visical. My Android phone keeps throwing updates at me that are really adware in disguise.
Small Gigabyte problem, I think. Since I installed xubuntu I created another Linux Mint flash drive, the problem I am having is that Gigabyte is not checking for a bootable device on the USB 3.0. It now only boots from the SSD, I tried changing the boot sequence in the BIOS, but it is not working. Wondering if anybody else is having the same problem.
The only other option that I see is to use gpart to format the SSD and hopefully that will clean the boot sector also. Wonder why it is not checking for other bootable devices.
I found that hint, F12. I just did an install of Linux Mint 17.2, and the browse the home network does not work. I did an apt-get update/upgrade to get the system up to date, but no joy. Interesting, that the OS works correctly on one machine, but on mine it does not work as expected.
Not sure what else to try with Linux Mint to get it work correctly, any ideas?
Give up and stay with Windows 7? That's what I'll be doing. I guess if you're intent on sticking with Linux, it's probably time to go join a Linux forum somewhere and cross your fingers.
BTW, I edited my earlier post. Networking is definitely not working correctly for me on Mint. As a matter of fact, it's stupidly inconsistent.
There seems to be a real downer on Linux present here and I wonder what is going on. I have no idea what goes on with Ubuntu, xyzbutu, Mint etc. I've only used Debian for years having given up with the malformed, non-functional, GUI's and breakages of things like Ubuntu in frustration ages ago.
Admittedly if I want anything special with networking, say, I just edit the relevant config file. Easy peasy and just works. I guess that is not for everybody.
Luckily I back from my travels and in front of my Debian PC. No more struggling to get anything working with Win 7 on a laptop
In an earlier post I said "most", I am now changing that to "all" Linux derivatives.
I will be sticking with xubuntu, I am looking forward to that toggling back and forth to get the network browse just right, but not quite there. The project that I am working on, the Gigabyte box will replace the Raspberry Pi that I thought could do the job.
So far I have had SimpleIDE installed, that works, did not have a Propeller attached so I am not sure if that will be found. I will also be using freebasic, had that installed that works. To have a folder shared on the home network, I will do it the old fashioned way, edit smb.conf. At least I will not have to walk back and forth with a flash drive just to transfer relevant files on my home network. A plus for xubuntu, it found my network printer, or at least a close relative, but it does do a print out, close enough for Linux work. Keep reminding myself, it is free, not making any one rich, not locking myself in, err wait a minute I just did, xubuntu is the only one that works!
You cannot underestimate the speed improvement by using an SSD
I put one in my fastest laptop to replace the HDD. Magnificent!! Its only a 128GB but works fine.
My laptop is only an i3-3217 1.8GHz and now running Windows 10 64bit.
I used to take my laptop everywhere with me. With my iPhone6+ and/or iPad Mini Retina I mostly don't need my laptop.
I have been following these "little cpu boxes" for a while now. With an SSD they would do perfectly with a big screen (cheap these days) and wireless keyboard and mouse. Quite often the power brick (19V) is bigger than the cpu box.
Will be interesting to see some of these boxes using the new single chip AMD processor which has just been announced/released.
It's a bit too bad, but not unexpected, that this thread has gotten side-tracked off the subject. Not a problem though.
I just want to reiterate that these small machines are an excellent value. I've been highly surprised by the performance/cost ratio. Pop in some RAM and a cheap SSD and they will quickly, quietly, and cheaply do almost anything you would want a PC to do.
If you decide to buy one and plan to attach it to the back of a monitor or TV, get a USB 3.0 extension cable so you don't have to reach behind all the time to plug stuff in. You will thank me.
Cluso99, the AC adapter is not big at all, and it's hard to get the machine to use more than 12 watts.
It is just that. Fractured land, but it is also worth understanding the deal too.
And nothing is really free right? The way I have always looked at it is I have time and dollars and usually some priority. Sometimes one of those two is at a real premium too.
What Heater did was optimize on time by limiting his Linux scope to the set of things needed. This also optimizes for dollars, due to the os not costing real dollars to use.
Over some period of time, one learns that niche and it will pay off nicely in Linux land.
I'm often running Win 7 because I have dollars but not always enough time. People buy me the Win 7 too. So, I'm fine. No worries.
I happen to have sorted Ubuntu out mostly. I can make that one work on a lot of stuff, and I keep an older one well known handy. I just don't always need the latest. Same basic strategy as heater. I get good Linux value that way.
There are always a ton of Linux distributions to go for. Doing that is unwise, unless really knowing Linux is your goal.
Free software is all about you making your choices. Software you pay for is about getting stuff done.
Both propositions see hits and misses out there right now. Users sometimes have control, sometimes not.
Honestly, if you go back and evaluate your Windows or Mac OS time spent figuring out all the little annoyances, it's not all rosy.
Instead, invest this time in a Linux and stick with it. You will reach a point where you get past a lot of this Smile and will feel much better about the whole thing.
Or dont. Pay the dollars and enjoy the benefit of a well funded operation and a lot of hardware and use case testing intended to eliminate this stuff.
You get what you pay for.
Linux is a skill worth learning. It's about saving money and computing freedom. It's not about the ease of use, etc... Truth from the beginning.
It costs a lot of money to deliver a solid gui, hardware tested, stuff just works environment. Just remember that as you boot Linux for no dollars. It's not about competency, etc...
It is all about those dollars and what not paying them means for people.
And it means freedom. Run what you want, on mostly what you want, when you want, and it means write what you want too, as well as running everything from a text console or simple frame buffer to a fairly modern gui with a gpu and so forth.
Exercise that freedom, find what works, then master it. You will get the benefit of that for a long time.
All those Linux es work for somebody, and they put the investments they need to into the system. This is also something you can do. Give back. Few users fo, and that is OK, no worries, but it also means living with what did get done too.
A long time ago, I actually did work on parts of Mandrake and how it's X window setup was. Submitted some things and learned a lot. That one is long gone now, but that whole "scratch that itch" just isn't a slogan. Doing it matters and that is pretty much how Linux gets funded.
So that all means you would also be wise to understand what matters to the people who do your chosen Linux as those itches will be well scrayched, which is precisely why Heater uses Debian. Many Web / developer types do.
Gamers and others may well maximize another Linux. You get the idea.
I like a gui to work on, and Ubuntu does, at tines, scratch that itch well, so that is the Linux I like and use. They also do a nice, live setup, which I can boot, do stuff and move on too. Got one on my Keychain for stuff like disk recovery, or resetting home user lost passwords on Windows, an so forth.
All that took me a while, but now I have few worries.
All comes down to what is worth what for you. A day of configuration might be more expensive than a Windows Pro license, right?
Right.
Be sure and remind yourself of those things when in Linux land.
You may have run into a barrier in the new SSD techonology that the Linux GRUB is not working with. I haven't worked with USB3.0 as USB2.0 is stable, but early on USB3.0 was flaky.
And of course, everyone does something a bit proprietary with BIOS and some are more Linux friendly than others. I have been using a Gigabyte motherboard with Linux for years and it seems to be Linux friendly. Toshiba seems to be very Windows-centric; especially laptops.
The SSD hard disk technology is still evolving.
Old school hard disk boot loaders have long depended on a few sectors at the beginning of a hard disk to launch into code that allows alternative booting -- the Master Boot Record.
But hard disk manufacturers have been slowly developing a more elaborate alternative storage area that manages booting. It could be that you have such a feature and that you have defaulted out of reading the MBR that would normally point to Grub. (Grub2 does support the new alteranatives to MBR, but one has to be careful.)
Solid State Hard Disks have some very specific and special requirements that mechanical hard disks do not. In other words, they are adapted to appear to behave like a SATA or PATA hard disk, but have a very different physical configuration - sectors are not of similar size and the management of writing to, erasing data, and reading from are different.
There also are a couple of other utilities you can google for, Linux USB install. Just did a 17.2 Mint w/Cinnamon, and it even handled TinyCore which is kinda niche.
And contrary to some poster's comments, while there are lots of Linux users and tons of forums to search for answers, my experience has been that it is a rather smaller subset of those users who actually can diagnose, troubleshoot, and figure out a solution. A larger percentage seem to use their google-fu in place of that.
However it is free, and some of the distros, like Mint, seem to be mostly excellent at getting diverse h/w to boot and operate properly. Once before I had a problem with a Mint version, and when next I tried a newer version weeks later, everything just came up smelling roses.
I like Mint because it seems more up to date than the lauded Debian (unless you are on experimental?), but not as bleeding edge and off on their own Don Quixote journey as Ubuntu seems to be.
...there are lots of Linux users and tons of forums to search for answers, my experience has been that it is a rather smaller subset of those users who actually can diagnose, troubleshoot, and figure out a solution. A larger percentage seem to use their google-fu in place of that
I'm not sure why you are singling out Linux users there. Isn't google-fu the most commonly employed trouble shooting technique for any OS or software package and pretty much everything else now a days?
Given the huge size, scope and complexity of these things there is no way you are going to live long enough to read up on it all in advance just in case a problem arises. No, you want to get on with your task in hand, if a problem stops you in your tracks you can almost be sure someone has been there before an found a solution.
Which is not to say that reading around whatever you are dealing with is not a good idea. After all it is often the case that those solutions google finds are not correct, not optimal or have undesirable side effects.
I noticed a recurring opinion stated here which amounts to "Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing". You see it all over the net. I just don't get the idea. One could substitute "Linux" with any other OS with much the same meaning.
Sorry if all this talk of alternative operating systems is OT. When it comes to small, cheap computers it seems quite relevant to me.
I just want to reiterate that these small machines are an excellent value. I've been highly surprised by the performance/cost ratio. Pop in some RAM and a cheap SSD and they will quickly, quietly, and cheaply do almost anything you would want a PC to do.
Sorry RDL2004, I thought I was being helpful by describing, in detail, some of the occurrences that I was having trying to implement an OS that would be a good fit for the box that I was using. Sometimes I get the feeling that some of the forum members here are driven more by CAUSE than programming and tinkering.
I have been following this, which I will call, super small form factor for some time. In fact I thought the mini-itx form would be a winner, until Intel stepped in and completely took over, I guess they just had to do in Via. I was also following the Intel NUC, not sure where they are going with that. So Gigabyte, you just might have to be careful, Intel probably has there eyes on you. I say that because Gigabyte uses mainly Intel processors.
I had a discussion with my brother the other day about replacing my "giant" desktop computer with something like a Gigabyte box. I came away with, okay you have the Gigabyte box mounted on the back of your monitor, but what kind and how many peripherals will you have to get too bring it up to your desktop standard? Will a 5TB USB 3.0 external HD be sufficient, or will you need more stuff? Will you be using sleep mode extensively or will you want to shut it down everyday. If you want to shut down everyday, how long before it becomes a pain reaching in behind your monitor to find that little off/on button?
Yes, I am still interested in this form factor, but a computer is just a box, if you do not have the right OS that just works.
I was just concerned that another Windows vs Linux battle was going to flare up. I agree with Heater that discussion of operating systems is very relevant when talking about these machines.
I also thought burning an iso to pendrive would be a breeze, but as I previously mentioned -- I have only had good luck with Puppy Linux.
While I dislike the name "Puppy Linux", I have used it countless times for OS repairs and backups that require the hard disk in the computer be in an 'unmounted' status.
It is a good product, even if it seems a bit retro and child-like.
++++++++
The Gigabyte Brix really does look like a nice product and the price is certainly attractive. I just haven't seen it available in Taiwan. You guys in the USA and Europe get all the really good stuff.
My shop talk has merely tried to be informative about some of the Linux installation hazards. Windows comes pre-installed, so the problems of dual or triple boot are not a usual topic for the average Windows user.
It seems the Brix will dual boot Linux and that most of your woes are just about getting to know enough about Linux.
As I mentioned before, about the only downside I saw with the Brix is that you have to accept what it provides for video. There is no up-grade path for people that desire something significantly better.
These machines do have limitations, each individual situation needs to be evaluated.
The stock Intel graphics can play 1080p movies full screen and handle basic gaming. Running Windows 7 with the "Aero" interface is not a problem.
The Brix is never completely off if it's plugged in. The power usage difference between "off" and "sleep" is only about 1.2 watt. When in "sleep" mode it will return to active by pressing a key on a wired USB keyboard.
AC Adapter, Brix not attached 0.0 watts
Brix plugged in turned off 0.9 watts
Brix in "hibernate" mode 1.6 watts
Brix in "sleep" mode 2.1 watts
Brix running, OS idling 6.0 watts (estimated average)
Brix playing 1080p movie 12.0 watts (estimated average)
Brix WEI 3D assessment 16.0 watts (approximate peak value)
edit: Here is a link to a short review of the N2807 model on Youtube. The J1900 model I have is one step up. Dual core 1.6 GHz vs quad core 2.0 GHz (and fan) is the only real difference.
I was just concerned that another Windows vs Linux battle was going to flare up.
Yes, and that is why I was trying to be very careful in not mentioning Windows, it seems that as soon as that is mentioned, the forces seem obligated to get there OS in there. In fact, I just might use the word OS, and let everybody guess at what I am using. Then when I do find that OS, that just works, I will be productive, hopefully. And then I can become an elitist, and sit back, looking down at the struggling masses.
Today, because I am trying out all these different software systems, I wonder if my next investment should be in a USB cd/dvd player. Since I still have my "desktop' versions that need cd/dvd discs, to install an OS, I do not want to create another stack of USB flash drives with there specific usage. Since these little boxes just came on the scene, maybe there is a system yet to be worked out, in terms of reducing the amount of dedicated flash drives. I think that the cd/dvd discs are cheaper than those USB 3.0 flash drives. It is interesting that in the box that the Gigabyte came in, it contained a cd/dvd driver disc, hmm, how do I get to use that with the Brix?
I wonder if my next investment should be in a USB cd/dvd player.
Yeah, I got one. It's not a bad investment. Once in a while, something comes with software on the disc, and you have to use it, due to a registration number or something, or I want to do an OS install. Most of the time, more current software can be downloaded. When I need it, I really need it. The drive sits a lot of the time too. My USB floppy sits a lot more. Bet I've used it maybe 5 times. But I really needed to use it. If you are trying out systems, one or both of these is a good move. Besides, you can share the drive with a friend, or something. Get whatever it is done, then use the network after that.
As for OSes, I use the Smile out of Windows 7, am working on using Mac OS more (and that's largely because I love the GUI environment), and often the time investment associated with Linux isn't for me.
Run what makes the most sense for you. Maximize your time and resources. Linux is very often a trade of time for dollars. Either that makes good sense, or it doesn't. When I get a block of time to do this stuff, the OS is the LAST thing I personally want to futz with, so I just don't as often as I can.
Sometimes it makes sense to clarify something though. I think that's often taken for "USE LINUX!!" advocacy. Trust me, in my case it's not. I don't really care. An OS is an OS. If it gets you there, great! Rock it. Have fun! IMHO, the best move is to make sure you are familiar with the options out there. Do it over time, when it makes sense. If you end up pinned, you will know your options and probably still get to where you need to be.
I use one of these, but a flash drive is faster and less hassle. At least it's USB powered so only one cable to deal with. I got it on sale for $18. It's almost impossible to find a name brand flash drive for less than around $5, so disks are still a lot cheaper, slow though.
I have no problem using Windows 7. I like it and I've gotten used to all its little quirks and I know how to fix most of them. My only reason for trying to get Linux working is the lack of a usable, trustworthy, and non-invasive version of Windows to replace Win 7.
Yeah. That's a pretty great reason. For me, it was losing IRIX. Windows at that time was "meh", but I really did like Win2K. Sweet OS. IRIX was where I lived and worked though. Killer, but MIPS was on the ropes, and SGI was gonna pull out of the consumer / low end commercial space. The end.
Linux got me a nice UNIX, and a lot of little issues. Mostly, I dealt with them, one Google at a time. The desktop has never been stellar, though sometimes it rocks pretty hard. This varies extremely widely. And it's frustrating because there are a lot of efforts, and often it makes the most sense to just roll your own. X isn't where it needs to be to compete with the likes of Win 7 and Mac OS either. More efforts, more choices, more configs...
Win 7 has been just great. I like the OS a lot, and adding a few tools here and there gets it all done for me. Win 8.1 is OK with a nice shell program, but 10? Ugh. They have changed the model and I realize I don't see my computer in the same way I do my cell phone, but that's the model. Microsoft always wants to integrate and unify everything. That has it's good points and bad ones. This integration of touch UI, and the delivery model are both pretty bad points as far as I'm concerned.
...which is why I'm ramping up on Mac OS for Propeller / embedded projects. Throughout all of this, Linux has been the fall back tool. Like I wrote earlier, I've got a live Ubuntu on my keychain remastered with my favorites on it. Boots and works on most things. I like a well refined desktop environment though. Linux has never really offered that. But, it's kind of awesome anyway. If you really, really need to do something low level, or a hack, or just need dev tools quick, Linux is right there.
What I did last time I was using Linux a lot is just jump in, pick a distribution and go the whole way. Configure the Smile out of it, until it's just great. Then run it a loooong time. That's harder now, as things update, but still possible for a few year stretch.
You said it again, just a couple of posts after I mentioned that I don't understand what that statement means or why it is specific to a certain OS. What does it mean? And why it targeted that way around?
Considering that the Gigabyte Brix comes with Windows 7, that is actually a plus for me personally as it is more friendly with old XP software. The fact that it can dual-boot Linux is a second plus.
It is hard to believe that these are starting at merely $99.00 USD when the only similar computer that comes to mind is the Apple Mac Mini at $499.00 USD.
With Linux, it's all about who cares about what. Those things people really care about get attention, and that part of Linux is typically nice to use and largely bug free. Other parts? Maybe not so good. And there are competing efforts too. None of this is bad, it just is.
Microsoft has those same things going on in the building, but they are funded. So does Apple, and that's funded too, and managed differently as well, though I see Microsoft headed the same way Apple is.
It works like this:
You load Linux. Stuff doesn't work. What expectation is there that it should work? How is that funded to meet those expectations? Truth is, there is an expectation that it should work, but where it's not funded, people fix it when they feel like fixing it, or users can get in there and fix it. The whole thing is "scratch that itch" dependent.
As a user, there was no formal value exchange in terms of money to get Linux. You got it, and you use it. If you have a problem, you have a problem. You have choices. You can go and fix the problem yourself, and the code is right over here and the tools needed to compile that code are right over there. Have fun, please share. Or, you can wait for it to get fixed. Or, you can pay to have it fixed too, in a lot of cases.
But this is up to you, the user. Linux is worth exactly what you think it is and since you didn't exchange any dollars, there really isn't any expectation beyond what you see in front of you. Now, some companies offer this service, and they want dollars for it. Just another choice.
The user looking for a free OS, typically isn't spending dollars on it, but they do need it to work for them. Great! The more the merrier. That user is going to invest their time.
Now, Microsoft and Apple.
Microsoft wants dollars for their OS. Additionally, they make specific claims and set expectations too. The overall expectation is that it's gonna work, and they have funded that activity as well as formed partnerships, also funded in a business way, to make sure stuff works. Linux, by contrast, depends on people doing the work to make sure their stuff works with Linux, and "people" can be the device vendor, interested users, etc... few formal arrangements exist, though a lot of device manufacturers do make an effort because that helps sell devices.
Microsoft is making a specific value proposition, and they want your money and they use some of that money to improve on it all, have metrics, etc... that all basically setup to own the problem of things working. Linux has this sort of, but an awful lot depends on the good will of users and developers and distribution creators. Some of that is funded. A lot of it is not. You get what you get, unless you pay, and then somebody owns making sure you get what you paid for.
Apple, works like Microsoft, but with a twist! They also manage the hardware, and that allows them to add some value in ways that others can't, and they want your money for that too. Apple is kind of expensive, but they also own a lot of the experience and you get what you pay for, and you get a lot and you pay a lot too.
Most of that is subjective, but the general idea is true enough. The dynamics should be clear, in any case.
Now, when I load Windows and it doesn't work, I paid, and I'm miffed, because I paid, and I have the expectation that it should work, because that's why I paid. I can call people, and pay a bit more when warranted to get it to work. There is someone responsible for making it work for me and a lot of others. I also paid because Microsoft claims to have arrangements that were expensive for them to setup that improve on how it works for me, blah, blah, blah.
With Microsoft, it's about dollars. You pay for some expectations, and they collect and meet them. That's the overall expectation.
With Linux, you don't pay at all, unless you want or need to. Where you didn't pay, you get what you paid for. There aren't anywhere near the same expectations, and where they do exist, they either need dollars to be meaningful, or they are just overall goals, not so much commits that people can really count on.
The difference, and why I say trading time for dollars, is one expectation of open source software is that it's open source! The whole thing really does depend on people doing some work. Ideally, some of that work is contributing back changes, new features, documentation, bug fixes, whatever, but that can be as simple as you, yourself making the time and knowledge expectation to get what you want out of the software. Nobody is doing this for you. Well, they do sometimes, but really, it's all on you.
And because it is possible for any of us to go and fix the Linux in many cases, often we can expect to have to do that, or wait for somebody to do that. Or pay for somebody to do that.
Windows? We can't go and fix the windows. We paid for it, it's closed, and we must depend on Microsoft to meet our expectations. You can expect to spend dollars to make things happen, but if you do spend those dollars, the promise is a whole lot got done for you too.
Time or dollars?
In both cases, people need to configure, learn stuff, etc... Again, because Windows is closed, when you do make that time and knowledge investment, you expect it to pay off, but Microsoft might change everything. You don't get a choice on this. With Linux, it's open. You can make those same investments, and you have a lot of control and choice as to how long you want them to pay off.
Does that help some?
People running a "free" OS, really don't have claim to the same sorts of expectations that people running a paid for OS do. That difference is subtle, but worth understanding. There are a huge number of projects out there that a lot of people and big companies depend on and they exist and are maintained simply because somebody finds doing that worth it. When they no longer find doing it worth it, it's not gonna get done, until somebody else does.
Windows, due to the fact that it's funded, claims to continue to exist, that your stuff will continue to work, and all of that is how they earn the money. They are supposed to deliver more value in return for that money.
Is that true? Subjective for sure.
But when I say, "trade time for dollars", I'm speaking right to the core difference between open source software and proprietary software and what that can mean in terms of the value you get, expectations you have, and so forth.
The Linux ecosystem is happy to have you, but you can walk away too. Nobody really cares, because it's not about that. Microsoft wants you and will do stuff to get your money and they care when you walk away, because it's about the money. Big, but subtle difference there.
I'll read people writing things as if they paid something, as if those expectations are there. But they aren't! Linux, unless you choose to pay for some services, etc... is take it or leave it. If it works, great, but when it doesn't, it's all up to you the user to evaluate your time and potentially dollars to resolve that scenario. Your average Linux user didn't really make any commits, nor contributed any dollars. So they get what they get out of it. Up to them.
That's another way to put that "time or dollars" trade.
A license of Windows Pro gets you a lot of stuff! Driver support, testing, certification, etc... They have assurances and a funded process in place to make sure that's as true as they can to make the money from you.
A license of Linux also gets you a lot of stuff. But it's not really funded, and whatever processes are in place are whatever people think is worth doing. They aren't about the money. They are about use value, and they are getting theirs, and ideally you pick up a license and get yours too, but if you don't, you don't. No worries.
Considering that the Gigabyte Brix comes with Windows 7...
Actually, the Brix is a "barebones" computer and doesn't come with an OS installed. It also requires that you supply a disk drive and memory. No need to spend a lot though. A fully functional machine should cost less than $200
I installed Win 7 first because I knew I'd be multi-booting various Linux versions. I'll probably keep Windows and just run it in permanent "free trial" mode. Costs the same as Linux that way and I don't mind the hassle.
The Mac Mini was the original mini PC wasn't it? It's the only Apple product I've ever considered buying. New ones starting at $499, are more powerful than the low end Brix models, but Apple products always seem overpriced for what you get. I looked on ebay and older Minis seem to go for pretty cheap. A decent C2D 2 GHz model went unsold today with a $99 starting bid.
I see another quantum shift in PC's on the horizon...
Tablets
Battery powered where you want to use them with/without AC power...
Small and portable.
Products like iPad Mini/standard/12" (new one), and maybe larger.
Products like Surface Pro.
Windows/iOS/Android
PC/Laptop Replacement - MiniPC's
Where you want to use them with AC power always available...
Small, usually fixed location as a PC/Laptop replacement. Some for transportable use.
New products like the Mac Mini and smaller (such as we are referring to in this thread)
Mostly Windows based, but sometimes Linux. Some Android, some iOS or OS-X.
MiniPC's use will often have separate Monitor, Keyboard & Mouse at each destination.
They will use SSDs for transportable use, and some fixed users will also use SSD for speed.
USB 3.0 (or WiFi) HDD's will often be used for transportable use too.
MiniPC's will soon be fuelled by the new AMD single chip CPU too! Intel will have to follow suit.
Future
PC's will continue to decline except for specialised high end and gaming.
Laptops will start to decline, with the market being split between the new (mostly) MiniPC's and Tablets.
The MiniPC's will be the bigger market because they will replace the PC's in businesses.
I have been hanging out for a cheaper+faster MacMini size for years now.
BTW I am anticipating Apple to begin to power some of their Macs/Laptops/MacMini with Apple's A9 (or later) ARM 64-bit processors. Watch for OS-X to run on Apple's ARM processors. They will be so much cheaper for Apple to produce rather than Intel based. They will lose Windows software compatibility so Apple might just find a workaround. Apple was burnt by Intel's delay in the latest chips.
We had a small discussion about Linux installs not being able to to see the home network. Today I did some more investigation and the result:
sudo nano /etc/samba/smb.conf
add -
name resolve order = bcast host
just below -
workgroup = WORKGROUP
Make sure you have the latest samba installed, sudo apt-get install samba
Since I am using xubuntu 15.10 on my Brix box, this seems to have solved the problem of getting access to the home network. Now when you hit the browse the network, it actually shows my home network.
Next I will try this on my Raspberry Pi units, I think that I should get the home network with those also.
Comments
The problem here appears to be on-going updates by programers of the user interface.
Frankly I hate this in any OS. Just when I know where everything is, somebody gets a bright idea to change the way things are done in order to glean some expected new wave of popularity.
Simply put, the configuration menus are all migrated into a new scheme. In Debian 8.x, I have the same problem with seeking out the 'tweaks' in the GNOME 'Tweak Tool'. This cute nonsense wasn't present in earlier Debian
https://packages.debian.org/wheezy/gnome-tweak-tool
There simply is no immunity to programmers getting a brainwave and creating an update just to justify staying on the payroll. Some days, I think I could have lived happily ever after with DOS 3.1, Wordstar, and Visical. My Android phone keeps throwing updates at me that are really adware in disguise.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/linus-torvalds-finds-gnome-3-4-to-be-a-total-user-experience-design-failure/
The only other option that I see is to use gpart to format the SSD and hopefully that will clean the boot sector also. Wonder why it is not checking for other bootable devices.
Ray
Not sure what else to try with Linux Mint to get it work correctly, any ideas?
Ray
BTW, I edited my earlier post. Networking is definitely not working correctly for me on Mint. As a matter of fact, it's stupidly inconsistent.
Admittedly if I want anything special with networking, say, I just edit the relevant config file. Easy peasy and just works. I guess that is not for everybody.
Luckily I back from my travels and in front of my Debian PC. No more struggling to get anything working with Win 7 on a laptop
I will be sticking with xubuntu, I am looking forward to that toggling back and forth to get the network browse just right, but not quite there. The project that I am working on, the Gigabyte box will replace the Raspberry Pi that I thought could do the job.
So far I have had SimpleIDE installed, that works, did not have a Propeller attached so I am not sure if that will be found. I will also be using freebasic, had that installed that works. To have a folder shared on the home network, I will do it the old fashioned way, edit smb.conf. At least I will not have to walk back and forth with a flash drive just to transfer relevant files on my home network. A plus for xubuntu, it found my network printer, or at least a close relative, but it does do a print out, close enough for Linux work. Keep reminding myself, it is free, not making any one rich, not locking myself in, err wait a minute I just did, xubuntu is the only one that works!
Ray
I put one in my fastest laptop to replace the HDD. Magnificent!! Its only a 128GB but works fine.
My laptop is only an i3-3217 1.8GHz and now running Windows 10 64bit.
I used to take my laptop everywhere with me. With my iPhone6+ and/or iPad Mini Retina I mostly don't need my laptop.
I have been following these "little cpu boxes" for a while now. With an SSD they would do perfectly with a big screen (cheap these days) and wireless keyboard and mouse. Quite often the power brick (19V) is bigger than the cpu box.
Will be interesting to see some of these boxes using the new single chip AMD processor which has just been announced/released.
I just want to reiterate that these small machines are an excellent value. I've been highly surprised by the performance/cost ratio. Pop in some RAM and a cheap SSD and they will quickly, quietly, and cheaply do almost anything you would want a PC to do.
If you decide to buy one and plan to attach it to the back of a monitor or TV, get a USB 3.0 extension cable so you don't have to reach behind all the time to plug stuff in. You will thank me.
Cluso99, the AC adapter is not big at all, and it's hard to get the machine to use more than 12 watts.
I do believe that's the real problem with Linux. It's a fractured land.
And nothing is really free right? The way I have always looked at it is I have time and dollars and usually some priority. Sometimes one of those two is at a real premium too.
What Heater did was optimize on time by limiting his Linux scope to the set of things needed. This also optimizes for dollars, due to the os not costing real dollars to use.
Over some period of time, one learns that niche and it will pay off nicely in Linux land.
I'm often running Win 7 because I have dollars but not always enough time. People buy me the Win 7 too. So, I'm fine. No worries.
I happen to have sorted Ubuntu out mostly. I can make that one work on a lot of stuff, and I keep an older one well known handy. I just don't always need the latest. Same basic strategy as heater. I get good Linux value that way.
There are always a ton of Linux distributions to go for. Doing that is unwise, unless really knowing Linux is your goal.
Free software is all about you making your choices. Software you pay for is about getting stuff done.
Both propositions see hits and misses out there right now. Users sometimes have control, sometimes not.
Honestly, if you go back and evaluate your Windows or Mac OS time spent figuring out all the little annoyances, it's not all rosy.
Instead, invest this time in a Linux and stick with it. You will reach a point where you get past a lot of this Smile and will feel much better about the whole thing.
Or dont. Pay the dollars and enjoy the benefit of a well funded operation and a lot of hardware and use case testing intended to eliminate this stuff.
You get what you pay for.
Linux is a skill worth learning. It's about saving money and computing freedom. It's not about the ease of use, etc... Truth from the beginning.
It costs a lot of money to deliver a solid gui, hardware tested, stuff just works environment. Just remember that as you boot Linux for no dollars. It's not about competency, etc...
It is all about those dollars and what not paying them means for people.
And it means freedom. Run what you want, on mostly what you want, when you want, and it means write what you want too, as well as running everything from a text console or simple frame buffer to a fairly modern gui with a gpu and so forth.
Exercise that freedom, find what works, then master it. You will get the benefit of that for a long time.
All those Linux es work for somebody, and they put the investments they need to into the system. This is also something you can do. Give back. Few users fo, and that is OK, no worries, but it also means living with what did get done too.
A long time ago, I actually did work on parts of Mandrake and how it's X window setup was. Submitted some things and learned a lot. That one is long gone now, but that whole "scratch that itch" just isn't a slogan. Doing it matters and that is pretty much how Linux gets funded.
So that all means you would also be wise to understand what matters to the people who do your chosen Linux as those itches will be well scrayched, which is precisely why Heater uses Debian. Many Web / developer types do.
Gamers and others may well maximize another Linux. You get the idea.
I like a gui to work on, and Ubuntu does, at tines, scratch that itch well, so that is the Linux I like and use. They also do a nice, live setup, which I can boot, do stuff and move on too. Got one on my Keychain for stuff like disk recovery, or resetting home user lost passwords on Windows, an so forth.
All that took me a while, but now I have few worries.
All comes down to what is worth what for you. A day of configuration might be more expensive than a Windows Pro license, right?
Right.
Be sure and remind yourself of those things when in Linux land.
YMMV
And of course, everyone does something a bit proprietary with BIOS and some are more Linux friendly than others. I have been using a Gigabyte motherboard with Linux for years and it seems to be Linux friendly. Toshiba seems to be very Windows-centric; especially laptops.
The SSD hard disk technology is still evolving.
Old school hard disk boot loaders have long depended on a few sectors at the beginning of a hard disk to launch into code that allows alternative booting -- the Master Boot Record.
But hard disk manufacturers have been slowly developing a more elaborate alternative storage area that manages booting. It could be that you have such a feature and that you have defaulted out of reading the MBR that would normally point to Grub. (Grub2 does support the new alteranatives to MBR, but one has to be careful.)
Solid State Hard Disks have some very specific and special requirements that mechanical hard disks do not. In other words, they are adapted to appear to behave like a SATA or PATA hard disk, but have a very different physical configuration - sectors are not of similar size and the management of writing to, erasing data, and reading from are different.
Just do a search on Pendrive Linux, and there is an application that will create everything for you on a USB drive, just need the .iso.
http://www.pendrivelinux.com/
There also are a couple of other utilities you can google for, Linux USB install. Just did a 17.2 Mint w/Cinnamon, and it even handled TinyCore which is kinda niche.
And contrary to some poster's comments, while there are lots of Linux users and tons of forums to search for answers, my experience has been that it is a rather smaller subset of those users who actually can diagnose, troubleshoot, and figure out a solution. A larger percentage seem to use their google-fu in place of that.
However it is free, and some of the distros, like Mint, seem to be mostly excellent at getting diverse h/w to boot and operate properly. Once before I had a problem with a Mint version, and when next I tried a newer version weeks later, everything just came up smelling roses.
I like Mint because it seems more up to date than the lauded Debian (unless you are on experimental?), but not as bleeding edge and off on their own Don Quixote journey as Ubuntu seems to be.
Also, just found a Mint SSD optimization post:
http://mintguide.org/system/323-optimizing-linux-mint-for-the-solid-state-drive-ssd.html
Given the huge size, scope and complexity of these things there is no way you are going to live long enough to read up on it all in advance just in case a problem arises. No, you want to get on with your task in hand, if a problem stops you in your tracks you can almost be sure someone has been there before an found a solution.
Which is not to say that reading around whatever you are dealing with is not a good idea. After all it is often the case that those solutions google finds are not correct, not optimal or have undesirable side effects.
I noticed a recurring opinion stated here which amounts to "Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing". You see it all over the net. I just don't get the idea. One could substitute "Linux" with any other OS with much the same meaning.
Sorry if all this talk of alternative operating systems is OT. When it comes to small, cheap computers it seems quite relevant to me.
I have been following this, which I will call, super small form factor for some time. In fact I thought the mini-itx form would be a winner, until Intel stepped in and completely took over, I guess they just had to do in Via. I was also following the Intel NUC, not sure where they are going with that. So Gigabyte, you just might have to be careful, Intel probably has there eyes on you. I say that because Gigabyte uses mainly Intel processors.
I had a discussion with my brother the other day about replacing my "giant" desktop computer with something like a Gigabyte box. I came away with, okay you have the Gigabyte box mounted on the back of your monitor, but what kind and how many peripherals will you have to get too bring it up to your desktop standard? Will a 5TB USB 3.0 external HD be sufficient, or will you need more stuff? Will you be using sleep mode extensively or will you want to shut it down everyday. If you want to shut down everyday, how long before it becomes a pain reaching in behind your monitor to find that little off/on button?
Yes, I am still interested in this form factor, but a computer is just a box, if you do not have the right OS that just works.
Ray
While I dislike the name "Puppy Linux", I have used it countless times for OS repairs and backups that require the hard disk in the computer be in an 'unmounted' status.
It is a good product, even if it seems a bit retro and child-like.
++++++++
The Gigabyte Brix really does look like a nice product and the price is certainly attractive. I just haven't seen it available in Taiwan. You guys in the USA and Europe get all the really good stuff.
My shop talk has merely tried to be informative about some of the Linux installation hazards. Windows comes pre-installed, so the problems of dual or triple boot are not a usual topic for the average Windows user.
It seems the Brix will dual boot Linux and that most of your woes are just about getting to know enough about Linux.
As I mentioned before, about the only downside I saw with the Brix is that you have to accept what it provides for video. There is no up-grade path for people that desire something significantly better.
The stock Intel graphics can play 1080p movies full screen and handle basic gaming. Running Windows 7 with the "Aero" interface is not a problem.
The Brix is never completely off if it's plugged in. The power usage difference between "off" and "sleep" is only about 1.2 watt. When in "sleep" mode it will return to active by pressing a key on a wired USB keyboard.
edit: Here is a link to a short review of the N2807 model on Youtube. The J1900 model I have is one step up. Dual core 1.6 GHz vs quad core 2.0 GHz (and fan) is the only real difference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNEaDt27De4
Today, because I am trying out all these different software systems, I wonder if my next investment should be in a USB cd/dvd player. Since I still have my "desktop' versions that need cd/dvd discs, to install an OS, I do not want to create another stack of USB flash drives with there specific usage. Since these little boxes just came on the scene, maybe there is a system yet to be worked out, in terms of reducing the amount of dedicated flash drives. I think that the cd/dvd discs are cheaper than those USB 3.0 flash drives. It is interesting that in the box that the Gigabyte came in, it contained a cd/dvd driver disc, hmm, how do I get to use that with the Brix?
Ray
As for OSes, I use the Smile out of Windows 7, am working on using Mac OS more (and that's largely because I love the GUI environment), and often the time investment associated with Linux isn't for me.
Run what makes the most sense for you. Maximize your time and resources. Linux is very often a trade of time for dollars. Either that makes good sense, or it doesn't. When I get a block of time to do this stuff, the OS is the LAST thing I personally want to futz with, so I just don't as often as I can.
Sometimes it makes sense to clarify something though. I think that's often taken for "USE LINUX!!" advocacy. Trust me, in my case it's not. I don't really care. An OS is an OS. If it gets you there, great! Rock it. Have fun! IMHO, the best move is to make sure you are familiar with the options out there. Do it over time, when it makes sense. If you end up pinned, you will know your options and probably still get to where you need to be.
Good as it gets, IMHO.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151275
I have no problem using Windows 7. I like it and I've gotten used to all its little quirks and I know how to fix most of them. My only reason for trying to get Linux working is the lack of a usable, trustworthy, and non-invasive version of Windows to replace Win 7.
Linux got me a nice UNIX, and a lot of little issues. Mostly, I dealt with them, one Google at a time. The desktop has never been stellar, though sometimes it rocks pretty hard. This varies extremely widely. And it's frustrating because there are a lot of efforts, and often it makes the most sense to just roll your own. X isn't where it needs to be to compete with the likes of Win 7 and Mac OS either. More efforts, more choices, more configs...
Win 7 has been just great. I like the OS a lot, and adding a few tools here and there gets it all done for me. Win 8.1 is OK with a nice shell program, but 10? Ugh. They have changed the model and I realize I don't see my computer in the same way I do my cell phone, but that's the model. Microsoft always wants to integrate and unify everything. That has it's good points and bad ones. This integration of touch UI, and the delivery model are both pretty bad points as far as I'm concerned.
...which is why I'm ramping up on Mac OS for Propeller / embedded projects. Throughout all of this, Linux has been the fall back tool. Like I wrote earlier, I've got a live Ubuntu on my keychain remastered with my favorites on it. Boots and works on most things. I like a well refined desktop environment though. Linux has never really offered that. But, it's kind of awesome anyway. If you really, really need to do something low level, or a hack, or just need dev tools quick, Linux is right there.
What I did last time I was using Linux a lot is just jump in, pick a distribution and go the whole way. Configure the Smile out of it, until it's just great. Then run it a loooong time. That's harder now, as things update, but still possible for a few year stretch.
When it comes to "small" computers I imagine this: http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/162710/the-vocore-a-tiny-computer-an-intelligent-prop-plug
It is hard to believe that these are starting at merely $99.00 USD when the only similar computer that comes to mind is the Apple Mac Mini at $499.00 USD.
http://www.apple.com/mac-mini/
I guess that I would just have to give it 5 more plusses for price, and another plus for not requiring special Apple cables.
Microsoft has those same things going on in the building, but they are funded. So does Apple, and that's funded too, and managed differently as well, though I see Microsoft headed the same way Apple is.
It works like this:
You load Linux. Stuff doesn't work. What expectation is there that it should work? How is that funded to meet those expectations? Truth is, there is an expectation that it should work, but where it's not funded, people fix it when they feel like fixing it, or users can get in there and fix it. The whole thing is "scratch that itch" dependent.
As a user, there was no formal value exchange in terms of money to get Linux. You got it, and you use it. If you have a problem, you have a problem. You have choices. You can go and fix the problem yourself, and the code is right over here and the tools needed to compile that code are right over there. Have fun, please share. Or, you can wait for it to get fixed. Or, you can pay to have it fixed too, in a lot of cases.
But this is up to you, the user. Linux is worth exactly what you think it is and since you didn't exchange any dollars, there really isn't any expectation beyond what you see in front of you. Now, some companies offer this service, and they want dollars for it. Just another choice.
The user looking for a free OS, typically isn't spending dollars on it, but they do need it to work for them. Great! The more the merrier. That user is going to invest their time.
Now, Microsoft and Apple.
Microsoft wants dollars for their OS. Additionally, they make specific claims and set expectations too. The overall expectation is that it's gonna work, and they have funded that activity as well as formed partnerships, also funded in a business way, to make sure stuff works. Linux, by contrast, depends on people doing the work to make sure their stuff works with Linux, and "people" can be the device vendor, interested users, etc... few formal arrangements exist, though a lot of device manufacturers do make an effort because that helps sell devices.
Microsoft is making a specific value proposition, and they want your money and they use some of that money to improve on it all, have metrics, etc... that all basically setup to own the problem of things working. Linux has this sort of, but an awful lot depends on the good will of users and developers and distribution creators. Some of that is funded. A lot of it is not. You get what you get, unless you pay, and then somebody owns making sure you get what you paid for.
Apple, works like Microsoft, but with a twist! They also manage the hardware, and that allows them to add some value in ways that others can't, and they want your money for that too. Apple is kind of expensive, but they also own a lot of the experience and you get what you pay for, and you get a lot and you pay a lot too.
Most of that is subjective, but the general idea is true enough. The dynamics should be clear, in any case.
Now, when I load Windows and it doesn't work, I paid, and I'm miffed, because I paid, and I have the expectation that it should work, because that's why I paid. I can call people, and pay a bit more when warranted to get it to work. There is someone responsible for making it work for me and a lot of others. I also paid because Microsoft claims to have arrangements that were expensive for them to setup that improve on how it works for me, blah, blah, blah.
With Microsoft, it's about dollars. You pay for some expectations, and they collect and meet them. That's the overall expectation.
With Linux, you don't pay at all, unless you want or need to. Where you didn't pay, you get what you paid for. There aren't anywhere near the same expectations, and where they do exist, they either need dollars to be meaningful, or they are just overall goals, not so much commits that people can really count on.
The difference, and why I say trading time for dollars, is one expectation of open source software is that it's open source! The whole thing really does depend on people doing some work. Ideally, some of that work is contributing back changes, new features, documentation, bug fixes, whatever, but that can be as simple as you, yourself making the time and knowledge expectation to get what you want out of the software. Nobody is doing this for you. Well, they do sometimes, but really, it's all on you.
And because it is possible for any of us to go and fix the Linux in many cases, often we can expect to have to do that, or wait for somebody to do that. Or pay for somebody to do that.
Windows? We can't go and fix the windows. We paid for it, it's closed, and we must depend on Microsoft to meet our expectations. You can expect to spend dollars to make things happen, but if you do spend those dollars, the promise is a whole lot got done for you too.
Time or dollars?
In both cases, people need to configure, learn stuff, etc... Again, because Windows is closed, when you do make that time and knowledge investment, you expect it to pay off, but Microsoft might change everything. You don't get a choice on this. With Linux, it's open. You can make those same investments, and you have a lot of control and choice as to how long you want them to pay off.
Does that help some?
People running a "free" OS, really don't have claim to the same sorts of expectations that people running a paid for OS do. That difference is subtle, but worth understanding. There are a huge number of projects out there that a lot of people and big companies depend on and they exist and are maintained simply because somebody finds doing that worth it. When they no longer find doing it worth it, it's not gonna get done, until somebody else does.
Windows, due to the fact that it's funded, claims to continue to exist, that your stuff will continue to work, and all of that is how they earn the money. They are supposed to deliver more value in return for that money.
Is that true? Subjective for sure.
But when I say, "trade time for dollars", I'm speaking right to the core difference between open source software and proprietary software and what that can mean in terms of the value you get, expectations you have, and so forth.
The Linux ecosystem is happy to have you, but you can walk away too. Nobody really cares, because it's not about that. Microsoft wants you and will do stuff to get your money and they care when you walk away, because it's about the money. Big, but subtle difference there.
I'll read people writing things as if they paid something, as if those expectations are there. But they aren't! Linux, unless you choose to pay for some services, etc... is take it or leave it. If it works, great, but when it doesn't, it's all up to you the user to evaluate your time and potentially dollars to resolve that scenario. Your average Linux user didn't really make any commits, nor contributed any dollars. So they get what they get out of it. Up to them.
That's another way to put that "time or dollars" trade.
A license of Windows Pro gets you a lot of stuff! Driver support, testing, certification, etc... They have assurances and a funded process in place to make sure that's as true as they can to make the money from you.
A license of Linux also gets you a lot of stuff. But it's not really funded, and whatever processes are in place are whatever people think is worth doing. They aren't about the money. They are about use value, and they are getting theirs, and ideally you pick up a license and get yours too, but if you don't, you don't. No worries.
Actually, the Brix is a "barebones" computer and doesn't come with an OS installed. It also requires that you supply a disk drive and memory. No need to spend a lot though. A fully functional machine should cost less than $200
I installed Win 7 first because I knew I'd be multi-booting various Linux versions. I'll probably keep Windows and just run it in permanent "free trial" mode. Costs the same as Linux that way and I don't mind the hassle.
Tablets
Battery powered where you want to use them with/without AC power...
Small and portable.
Products like iPad Mini/standard/12" (new one), and maybe larger.
Products like Surface Pro.
Windows/iOS/Android
PC/Laptop Replacement - MiniPC's
Where you want to use them with AC power always available...
Small, usually fixed location as a PC/Laptop replacement. Some for transportable use.
New products like the Mac Mini and smaller (such as we are referring to in this thread)
Mostly Windows based, but sometimes Linux. Some Android, some iOS or OS-X.
MiniPC's use will often have separate Monitor, Keyboard & Mouse at each destination.
They will use SSDs for transportable use, and some fixed users will also use SSD for speed.
USB 3.0 (or WiFi) HDD's will often be used for transportable use too.
MiniPC's will soon be fuelled by the new AMD single chip CPU too! Intel will have to follow suit.
Future
PC's will continue to decline except for specialised high end and gaming.
Laptops will start to decline, with the market being split between the new (mostly) MiniPC's and Tablets.
The MiniPC's will be the bigger market because they will replace the PC's in businesses.
I have been hanging out for a cheaper+faster MacMini size for years now.
BTW I am anticipating Apple to begin to power some of their Macs/Laptops/MacMini with Apple's A9 (or later) ARM 64-bit processors. Watch for OS-X to run on Apple's ARM processors. They will be so much cheaper for Apple to produce rather than Intel based. They will lose Windows software compatibility so Apple might just find a workaround. Apple was burnt by Intel's delay in the latest chips.
Just my view of the world
sudo nano /etc/samba/smb.conf
add -
name resolve order = bcast host
just below -
workgroup = WORKGROUP
Make sure you have the latest samba installed, sudo apt-get install samba
Since I am using xubuntu 15.10 on my Brix box, this seems to have solved the problem of getting access to the home network. Now when you hit the browse the network, it actually shows my home network.
Next I will try this on my Raspberry Pi units, I think that I should get the home network with those also.
Ray
People are still trying to use that local network sharing SAMBA stuff?