Buying a laptop with no OS (to install Linux on).
in [UK Linux]
|
From: Kevin Safford on 24 Mar 2010 14:09 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:33:29 +0000, Poster Matt wrote: > I'm intending to buy a new laptop and install Linux on it. Searching > around I've found it very hard to find a laptop for sale with no > operating system on it. In fact a company called Novatech (which I've > used before) is the only one I can find. This site has a list of companies that sell computers without an OS: http://nakedcomputers.org/ Here's their blurb, before anybody gets the idea I'm spamming the group: <quote>If you want to use a Free and Open Source operating system on a computer then it is rather objectionable to be forced to purchase a proprietary operating system bundled with the hardware you want. This site lists and promotes computer shops both online and in the real world that will sell a pure, unadulterated, stark naked computer, fresh as the day it was born waiting for you to install the operating system of your choice.</quote> -- Kevin Safford kevin full stop safford at ntlworld full stop com
From: Graham Murray on 24 Mar 2010 14:25 Martin Gregorie <martin(a)address-in-sig.invalid> writes: > Make sure it hasn't got an ATI display because those are abominably > supported by Linux (ATI don't want to know about Linux). Intel graphics > are OK (I'm using them) and nVidia are considered the best. What is wrong with the xorg ati (radeon, radeonhd, mach64, rage 128) drivers? Granted that they are desktops not laptops, but I have more problems with the video on my work PC which has an Nvidia card than my home one with an ATI Radeon.
From: Tony van der Hoff on 24 Mar 2010 14:30 On 24/03/10 16:33, Poster Matt wrote: > Hi, > > I'm intending to buy a new laptop and install Linux on it. Searching > around I've found it very hard to find a laptop for sale with no > operating system on it. In fact a company called Novatech (which I've > used before) is the only one I can find. > > Are there any other companies that you guys know of that sell OS free > laptops? It seems to me that there's a good chance that I will be forced > to pay for Windows even though I don't want it, a kind of Microsoft tax > achievable only as a result of their tremendous market dominance. > > Secondly - are there any laptop specific things I should keep in mind > when buying a laptop to install Linux on? Driver or hardware issues and > such like? I've never installed Linux on a laptop before. > > Finally are there any specific Linux distributions that I should think > about using or ones that I should avoid? > > Many thanks and regards, etc.. The problem for manufacturers in supplying an OS-free machine is in supporting it, as they are legally obliged to do. Not everyone who buys such a system is qualified to do so, unfortunately. So, they either just supply 'doze, or bump up the price to cover the additional support cost. I recently bought an HP Pavilion DV6 as an emergency replacement for my faithful 8 year old Dell which had died. I seriously considered Linux Emporium, but decided that at their prices I might as well buy something with Windows installed, and chuck away the 'doze; it would still be (considerably) cheaper. I know it's not playing the game, but sense must prevail over principle. I did some research at http://www.linux-on-laptops.com, and took the plunge, I'm a Debian fan, myself, but couldn't get the wireless working with that, so loaded 'buntu, and everything just worked. Never looked back; and I've still got 'doze dual boot, should I ever need it. I don't think I've done so up to now. HTH, tony
From: Bruce Stephens on 24 Mar 2010 14:37 Graham Murray <newspost(a)gmurray.org.uk> writes: > Martin Gregorie <martin(a)address-in-sig.invalid> writes: > >> Make sure it hasn't got an ATI display because those are abominably >> supported by Linux (ATI don't want to know about Linux). Intel graphics >> are OK (I'm using them) and nVidia are considered the best. > > What is wrong with the xorg ati (radeon, radeonhd, mach64, rage 128) > drivers? Granted that they are desktops not laptops, but I have more > problems with the video on my work PC which has an Nvidia card than my > home one with an ATI Radeon. My impression is that this is relatively recent. I went from NVidia to ATI a couple of months ago. The free NVidia driver was pretty useless (I want two monitors, and nv doesn't support that), but radeon supported that fine on the new card. What didn't work was GLX, but a little while ago even that's changed and (with radeonhd and a fairly recent kernel, but both from standard debian packages) things are working as well as anything I've used, all with free software. So overall I'd go for ATI, given a choice.
From: alexd on 24 Mar 2010 14:49
On 24/03/10 18:37, Bruce Stephens wrote: > My impression is that this is relatively recent. I went from NVidia to > ATI a couple of months ago. Ditto. > So overall I'd go for ATI, given a choice. Right now the proprietary driver isn't working in Unstable because xorg is newer than ATIs drivers, update due in April apparently. None of free drivers work with my card [HD5750], and the standard VGA driver is limited to 1600x1200. Oh well, such is life on the bleeding edge! -- <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm(a)ale.cx) 18:45:45 up 48 days, 20:51, 3 users, load average: 0.55, 0.28, 0.18 It is better to have been wasted and then sober than to never have been wasted at all |