* Linux

[ColeValleyGirl]

I have an older laptop that runs Win10 poorly... Would Linux with an emulator speed it up? Appreciate any advice if a virtual machine or an emulator would help my speed issues.

Linux on your laptop would likely transform it into a completely different machine (see caveats below). The resource demand is significantly lower than windows. Running a VM (virtual machine) under Linux is easy with something like Oracle Virtualbox. I run only Linux (KDE) on my desktop and laptop - it's been my primary OS for the last decade. On my laptop (Asus/8GB RAM/SSD), I can run multiple VMs at the same time. The biggest limitation is my available RAM. I can run a Windows 10 VM on that laptop with 4GB RAM. It not a speedy Win10, but it works okay. A Windows 7 VM works better with 4GB RAM.

Mike, how do you get from there to here?

To run Windows effectively in Linux within a Virtual Machine needs more RAM than running the same Windows version natively on the same hardware. So there is little if any benefit and you still need a Windows licence.

[tatewise]

I thought it was obvious.
If running Windows 10 on any hardware configuration performs poorly, then running the same Windows 10 on the same hardware in addition to Linux and a Virtual Machine cannot possibly perform any better.
That is what BakerJL75 is asking: "if a virtual machine or an emulator would help my speed issues." on an "older laptop that runs Win10 poorly".
No doubt Linux itself would perform better but he is not asking that.

[ColeValleyGirl]

Jackie says they use the laptop only rarely for Genealogy, so it may be that they could make better use of the laptop if it ran Linux natively, with the emulator infrequently -- the benefit derived depends on the use case, so can't be definitively said to be 'little if any'.

[davidf]

I have an older laptop that runs Win10 poorly... Would Linux with an emulator speed it up? Appreciate any advice if a virtual machine or an emulator would help my speed issues.

Linux on your laptop would likely transform it into a completely different machine (see caveats below). The resource demand is significantly lower than windows. Running a VM (virtual machine) under Linux is easy with something like Oracle Virtualbox.
...

That has been my experience. My last (current) laptop I bought 5 years ago (Intel i5 64bit, 8GB RAM, 250GB SSD - for the system etc, 1TB HD - for data) came with Windows 10 and my initial reaction after being "talked through" setting it up (by the on board software nanny) was "yuk".

So I took a downloaded version of Linux (Lubuntu 16.04 LTS), created a start up disk on a USB, plugged that into the USB and installed it as a dual boot system - with both Windows 10 and the Linux system able to read the 1TB "data" drive. The install program hand holds you through creating a separate partition for the Linux environment (critical if you want to save your Windows environment and data - but we all have full backups don't we? - even of FH settings!) and whilst most of the time you were just watching the system do its stuff it really is pretty straight forward. When you switch on (from cold) you get a text screen and you use up/down cursor keys to select which operating system to boot into. Sleep/Hibernate ("Suspend") keeps you in Linux and you have to completely shutdown to get back to the dual boot option.

Apart from having to go into Windows 10 to completely close it down (so that it released its exclusive grip on the data drive - which was a bit tricky - use an internet search for the key combination) I have not used Windows 10 since - in fact I can't remember the password.

Many "Windows" programs have Linux versions (Firefox browser etc, Thunderbird email, LibreOffice - which I think technically may be a port from Linux to Windows), and for other functionality there are close (often very close) equivalents - e.g. Strawberry Music Player, GIMP "GNU Image Manipulation Program" etc. Most are wrapped in the Linux distribution so everything updates in a compatible way!

In April the next cycle of Ubuntu based upgrades come out and I will probably install Ubuntu 22.04 LTS + LXDE and/or Cinnamon overwriting my unused Windows 10. Or I might try Linux Mint.

I run FH6 on Wine and the only pain is that the FH pdf printer (which carefully used can produce really mega banners) does not work and the Linux alternative does not allow such massive page sizes. I am delaying thinking about upgrading to FH7 until the background chatter about RTF problems seems to be sorted.

CAVEATS:

1. ...
   3. Your choice of Linux distribution and desktop has an impact; Ubuntu Linux requires more resources than other distros like Linux Mint or KDE. The desktop design of Ubuntu uses the Gnome3 desktop, which is a departure from the "desktop" concept that most windows users are comfortable with. Some Linux distributions are easier for a Windows user to transition to.
   ...

Linux enthusiasts are their own worst enemies - but then the development of Linux makes this almost inevitable! I would take issue with JPF on one matter.

My experience is that KDE is a desktop environment not a Linux distribution and it can be installed on a variety of Linux distributions; the Ubuntu version comes ready wrapped as "Kubuntu" - a flavour of Ubuntu

The Distribution / Desktop confusion can be (very) off putting to Windows users who are only offered one desktop - although "the Windows desktop" has been through multiple generations (Win 3.0 etc, Windows 95 / 98 / XP etc with the "Start key and bottom panel" though Windows 7 to the "mistake of Windows 8 and now on to the Windows 10/11 desktop).

With Linux, if you don't like it, you change it! Free software is not just £0, but also you have freedom in how you use it, how it looks; it is a different mindset.

Don't like Ubuntu (distribution) with GNOME3 (default desktop)? (I don't); install KDE (desktop) or LXDE (desktop - my preference).
Don't like Ubuntu because it's going 64bit exclusive and you have an old Netbook? I have just put Debian (distribution - the foundation from which Ubuntu "grows") with LXDE (desktop) on an old HP mininote 3122 (VIA C7-M cpu @ 1.6GHz, 2GB RAM, 160GB Hard disk) (Dare I install Wine & my second FH6 install? Probably that is pushing my luck with that system spec), but hey it's Linux - let's try! GRAMPS/Ancestris is always a fall back for viewing my data (but possibly not editing - but do I want to do that whilst "on the road"?).
The "Linux Mint" (distributions) also grow off Debian and come with a choice (at download - or later instal) of Cinnamon (GNOME3++), Mate (GNOME2++) or Xfce (Desktops)

Use Wikipedia to read up about different Distributions and Desktops (can be technical but look at the screen shots for something that feels comfortable), then Install Virtual Box (like JPF I make much use of VB - in my case for evaluation) and "Try before you Buy" - except with Linux the price should almost always be £0!

Ubuntu, OpenSuSe, Fedora are all backed by corporations that make a living supporting big corporations that use Linux - including Microsoft! Linux Mint is community supported and has been around a while, is very popular and is also built on Debian - the "grand-daddy of so many distributions".

The MATE or LXDE or LXQt desktops will be reasonably familiar to Windows 7 users.

[JP Ford]

If I understand correctly, and to summarise...

• To run Windows effectively in Linux within a Virtual Machine needs more RAM than running the same Windows version natively on the same hardware. So there is little if any benefit and you still need a Windows licence.
• Beware that there have been, and may still be, issues running FH V7 and also AS V7 in Windows 7.
• Using an emulator such as Wine or Crossover in Linux may run faster and does not need a Windows licence, but there are issues with some FH V7 and AS V7 features and it is more technically challenging to install and set up.

I'd say your first point is a bit incomplete, even if technically accurate. You can easily run a Windows VM under linux with the minimum Windows RAM requirements, which is 4GB. Most modern machines have at least 8GB. My laptop is almost 7 years old and it can still run a usable Windows 10 VM under Linux. It's not snappy, but it's functional, especially if you make some optimizations to get rid of some of the Microsoft bloat. If you're running an outdated & under-powered machine, then your hardware is your primary limitation.

Wine under Linux is not only problematic to configure and has known issues with FH and AS, it also still suffers from general security and stability issues, especially with advanced applications like FH. Crossover Linux is simply an improved Wine in a retail package with tech support. Still, if you have no Windows license, these are your only choices.

I would say that if you have a Windows license and 8GB of memory, a Window VM will give you the best user experience and functionality. If you have no Windows license, then your only choice is an emulator or to downgrade to using Windows as a primary OS.

[Mark1834]

Just to muddy the waters a little...

One aspect that nobody seems to have mentioned is how to manage Windows and Linux co-operating together. Linux has much stricter controls over file access and permissions, particularly for system files where a mistake could damage your installation and stop it working. How strictly root access is controlled also varies between Linux distributions.

I like to keep it simple, and have a Linux (Mint Cinnamon) box for what Linux does best, and a Windows box for what Windows does best (including FH), with shared KVM. Getting file permissions and network protocols set up correctly so they can talk to each other (and a Raspberry Pi NAS for my IP cameras running a different distribution, plus an old D-Link entry level NAS that is really a Linux box but optimised for the consumer (i.e. Windows) market, is far from simple! Plus for good measure access from an i-Pad, which is another different OS!

Your setup may be much simpler than this, but any element of running FH in a Linux environment is likely to involve shared access at some point.

[tatewise]

My summary was intended to be read in the context of Jackie's enquiry about speeding up "an older laptop that runs Win10 poorly" and "Would Linux with an emulator speed it up? Appreciate any advice if a virtual machine or an emulator would help my speed issues."

I agree that it is perfectly feasible to run Win 10 in a VM in Linux with reasonable performance, but Jackie is asking about using an existing older laptop that runs Win 10 poorly, so I don't believe Win 10 would run any better in a VM in Linux on the same hardware. Jackie doesn't want to put more money into the laptop so any upgrading is a non-starter.
However, the laptop already has 8GB RAM, so the poor performance is likely to be due to some other resource limit.
I accept that if genealogy with FH in Win 10 is only a minority use then Linux would be faster for most other applications.

[Mark1834]

Jackie doesn't want to put more money into the laptop so any upgrading is a non-starter.

Not so. Jackie said in her last posting that she might look at a cheap SSD. In my experience, that’s the best solution. It’s not dead money, as 2.5in disks are easy to repurpose, unlike the larger 3.5in version. As long as it has an SSD system disk and a clean bloat-free installation, Windows flies along for basic apps like office software and FH on very basic hardware (in my case, a Pentium CPU with 4 GB RAM).

All the Linux stuff is useful and interesting, but not the solution to the problem posed.

[tatewise]

Yes, agreed, I missed that change of mind. It was over a month ago but no feedback yet.

[GeneSniper]

Well here goes, I'm ready for the fall out. FH7 is designed to run on the Windows operating system, not Mac OS or Linux or any other OS for that matter. The sooner people recognise this the better. If you want to use a different OS then find a different genealogy package that works in the OS you want to use instead of wasting your time trying to get something that was designed to run on Windows to run on a different OS.

[AdrianBruce]

... wasting your time trying to get something that was designed to run on Windows to run on a different OS.

Yes but where's the fun in that?

For the person who doesn't consider that they run an operating system (yeah, I know...) but primarily wants to run FH (or any other Windows based application software), I can't see the mileage in wanting to explore Linux etc. It's a diversion that I for one, am no longer interested in, because I "don't run" an OS, I run application programs.

For the person who's really into thinking about OSs, well, they don't need us to advise them!

[GeneSniper]

You've obviously never looked at the amount of Linux and Mac posts that pop up Adrian

[ColeValleyGirl]

If Linux etc doesn't interest you, don't read the posts. They are however on topic here and telling people that they should not be using them is not.

[davidf]

I'll bite!

For the person who doesn't consider that they run an operating system (yeah, I know...) but primarily wants to run FH (or any other Windows based application software), I can't see the mileage in wanting to explore Linux etc. It's a diversion that I for one, am no longer interested in, because I "don't run" an OS, I run application programs.

For the person who doesn't consider that they run an application program (yeah, I know...) but primarily wants to do Genealogy (or any other activity assisted by computers), I can't see the mileage in wanting to explore FH etc. It's a diversion that I for one, am no longer interested in, because I "don't run" an application program, I do genealogy.

We all select a mix (which is defined by software vendors as a blurred mix of OS and application programs) - which often involves some level of compromise:

• Functionality
• Inter-operability
• Support
• Cost
• Hardware Requirements
• etc.

This mix evolves over time

My mix used to be

• DOS3.0 etc. & Sidekick > DR-DOS & GEM > Windows 3.0 > W95 > W98 > XP > Windows 7
• Lotus Symphony > Lotus 123 > MS Excel
• Lotus Symphony > Lotus Manuscript > Lotus Amipro > MS Word
• Mosaic > Netscape
• HP email > IBM "mail" on mainframe > Pegasus email on PC

Getting fed up with the pain and cost of upgrades (both licensing and hardware requirements) and issues with functionality (that Ribbon Interface) plus a dislike of some of Microsoft's monopolistic and data hovering practices, drove me to exercise my freedom to chose (a freedom that does not impact on others' freedoms!):

• IBM Symphony > Libre Office
• Firefox (browser)
• Thunderbird (email)

Realising that the above three programs all also ran on Linux (indeed may have been developed in Linux and then ported to Windows) prompted me to try Linux (assisted by an OU course - alternative (free) internet courses/tutorials are available). Initially run on Virtual Box on my Windows 7 laptop, but when its graphic card died, I took the leap described in a earlier post.

I feel that I am currently at a good compromise that suits me - with the freedom to experiment with other applications and desktops (most not so much "try before you buy", but just "try" - for £0)

Yes, pdf printing on FH is not as good (and RTF on FH7 is currently inoperative), but I believe that the combination of otherwise great functionality, modest price, an amazing supportive community (almost Linux like!) and familiarity makes that compromise worthwhile.

That does not stop me keeping the functionality under review in terms of

• wishing the above two mentioned issues could be addressed
• seeking enhanced functionality / methods of working
• off-loading (and possibly reloading) functionality / methods of working to other applications

If you have a little technical knowledge (and confidence) the seeking of functionality to do activities need not be constrained - it's a mindset - a very liberating one.

[Mark1834]

What William is overlooking is that Linux doesn’t have the same variety of quality genealogy apps that Windows does. It’s simply market forces - the large majority of FH users are home users “of a certain age”. That’s not the market Linux plays in. Even free community software needs a market.

Looking at my recent hardware upgrade, everything that I installed has a free Linux alternative that is every bit as good, apart from FH and RM. I chose maintaining a Windows box, others choose to make FH work on Linux. Both options are perfectly valid.

[GeneSniper]

What William is overlooking is that Linux doesn’t have the same variety of quality genealogy apps that Windows does. It’s simply market forces.

Oh my friend William does, you are making my point for me. Why look for something to run on a Windows PC that already does it all and can be done mainly for free if that's what floats your boat.

Looking at my recent hardware upgrade, everything that I installed has a free Linux alternative that is every bit as good, apart from FH and RM. I chose maintaining a Windows box, others choose to make FH work on Linux. Both options are perfectly valid.

Don't really understand this bit, do you mean software upgrade, then it kind of makes sense, if you do mean hardware upgrade then it would probably be a windows box that would do it all.

Now folks don't think for a minute I am getting down on Linux/unix, heck it still runs most of the internet and mobile phones and I am quite sure for some things it is the best operating system, but home use????? I'm not so sure. Haven't looked at it for years, but installing software was not a windows click the install button and it was an awful lot clunkier than Windows or MacOS in use. My other problem with it was that you had so many versions and none of them worked together so you had to install one and hope it had what you wanted on it or you needed a fair bit of computer know how to get something you wanted on your wee box. That's my opinion and maybe Linux is different now, but free is always a problem with me as lot's of these things rely on either a paid for version to support them, OR they become paid for (Red Hat for instance) and other peeps release the free version with the good bits removed OR they just disappear and you start all over with another distro.
And as for Apple no problem with that at all, I've got an iPhone and have Mobile Family Tree (MacFamily Tree) on it and even in the mobile version it is frighteningly good, If I had a Mac I wouldn't be trying to turn it into a Windows PC so that I could NOT run a full version of FH with no hiccups.

[GeneSniper]

Writing the post above got me interested in having a look at how much Linux had moved on since I last looked at it. Waste of a couple of hours there, stand by what I said above.

[davidf]

Haven't looked at it for years, but (1) installing software was not a windows click the install button and it was an awful lot clunkier than Windows or MacOS in use. My other problem with it was that you had so many versions and (2) none of them worked together so you had to install one and hope it had what you wanted on it or you needed a fair bit of computer know how to get something you wanted on your wee box. That's my opinion and maybe Linux is different now, but (3) free is always a problem with me as lot's of these things rely on either a paid for version to support them ...

Must be many years. In my experience - centred on Ubuntu Variants - but with some experience of the wider Debian Family. Others (openSuSE, Redhat etc.) might be just as good.

From your points above:
(1) It is a click and Install option

If the software (office, browser, email, music player, graphics manipulation) has not already come as part of the distribution - In which case it "works" as soon as the Installation (itself now a series of graphics pages guiding your choice of language, user name etc.) completes.

For stuff not in the distribution there is a "store". On Ubuntu & variants it looks something like:

Lubuntu "Software" app

Screenshot from 2022-03-29 22-26-59.png (134.13 KiB) Viewed 2448 times

You browse the applications, select and click to install. If you then don't like it or think its functionality is too limited to remain, you then click to uninstall. Simpler than Windows 7.

For stuff not in the store you can download a .deb file (for Debian family) or .rpm file (for most other distributions) and run install - much like installing a program under Windows. All my mainstream applications are "in the store".

The days of having to compile applications are long gone - although that facility is there for "build your own" style applications. Never had to do it except as an exercise on a Linux course.

(2) If it is the "store" it should work with everything else (and in my experience, if it works, it works fully). Also future updates to the application or to the operating system are compatible and happen together as a single one-click operation. In 5+ years I have only been caught out once - when the Calendar update in Thunderbird got a day behind the main program. But that problem effected Windows users as well.

(3) For many of the mainstream distributions and applications their development is sponsored (in money or in-kind - servers, IT staff time) funded through corporate support contracts (where there may be cloud storage and servers to manage with greater security issues and a need to manage backups and updates across all workstations and servers at approximately the same time preferably overnight etc.).

So Canonical is the principal corporate sponsor of Ubuntu (and partly sponsors Debian) building a business on support contracts. This gives confidence that the software will be there for some time. Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support) versions are released every two years with a 5 year code support horizon (and distribution upgrades that are near one-click). And of course the software is open source - so the source code is not copyrighted and is available on public servers, so in the unlikely event of a key sponsor abandoning its business (or going bust), the code is there for another sponsor to support.

"Free to me" means I can tap into the supported download repositories which manages security and functionality updates. Home User Support can be paid for (I expect) but I think most people use the various forums (bit like this one).

The "free to me" version is I believe exactly the same as the "corporate" versions at least for the software that I use. Practically all is free and open source, so if you really want to you can take it and "hack" it to suit your exact requirements (never have, but for simple thinks I think I could). You can then submit your code for consideration for inclusion in a future version.

As I said it is a different mindset. Different but no more difficult than Windows 7.

[GeneSniper]

Not sure it's as easy as you make out, but I will go with you on it.

For many of the mainstream distributions and applications their development is sponsored (in money or in-kind - servers, IT staff time) funded through corporate support contracts (where there may be cloud storage and servers to manage with greater security issues and a need to manage backups and updates across all workstations and servers at approximately the same time preferably overnight etc.).

This quote is what I alluded to in my reply, goodwill is fine until either some penny pincher at the company says "why are we doing all this for free, there's money to be made here" or business takes a big down turn and supporting this becomes economic disaster and penny pincher above repeats himself.

And that's my last word on this, PROMISE

[davidf]

This quote is what I alluded to in my reply, goodwill is fine until either some penny pincher at the company says "why are we doing all this for free, there's money to be made here" or business takes a big down turn and supporting this becomes economic disaster and penny pincher above repeats himself.

What the company (Canonical in the case of Ubuntu distributions) is doing "for free" is making managed download servers (that are available to their corporate paying customers) available to anyone - basically a properly secured website. For me to download a copy of Ubuntu costs them an un-noticable amount - if I want anything else I am pointed towards community forums or offered a corporate support contract (at significant cost).

There is money to be made - and I think Canonical (and others) make a good business helping corporates manage complex corporate networks. It is their business.

Canonical don't "own the code" - that is freely available to anyone (look at the number of "forks" of Linux where people have taken the code and gone and "done their own thing"). That keeps Canonical focused on providing good service to the corporates - because other suppliers are available.

But by being supportive they get a deep understanding of the software (and some influence on development) - it is enlightened self-interest (which I accept some penny pinchers-struggle to understand). It's as if RAC or AA could have an inside track on designing vehicles to make them less likely to unexpectedly break down.

They also generate a lot of good-will from "home" users and IT students some of who develop Linux skills and go on to work in corporate IT departments with a facility for and liking for the Ubuntu family of Linux distributions. Look at which Linux distributions have large market share and stable code.

If they tried to make money from the likes of me I could either freely get the code from elsewhere - or I could abandon Ubuntu and go Debian or Mint or Redhat or ... the applications run across distributions and apart from a few bits of command line syntax (for those who choose to go there!) the understanding and knowledge is easily transferred.

But the penny pinchers could be in Microsoft (or any other closed software company) saying "why support this huge amorphous mass of home users" at these "retail" prices; make them pay full corporate prices - the corporate world is where the money is to be made".

Within the Linux world there are examples of development groups folding and another group springing up (for example centred initially on a university IT faculty) providing ongoing development and code support. That does not happen as easily outside the free and open software field, if a development company fails, its "intellectual property" goes into the fire sale and anything could happen to it - because of code ownership.

And that's my last word on this, PROMISE

I suspect the moderators will require a similar promise from me - but what if FH had relevance in the corporate world and this enabled the code to be made freely available for joint development? What if Windows went open source and Microsoft concentrated on its Cloud Services and Corporate Support business?

[ColeValleyGirl]

It would be nice if this thread got back on track and on topic, answering Jackie's question at viewtopic.php?f=32&t=19508#p122098 with facts, rather than airing opinions about operating systems which tend to degenerate into 'true believers' in every camp talking past each other.

[davidf]

...
If I use a virtual machine (already have the license) it seems like since I'd be running the virtual machine as well as Windows it wouldn't be any faster. Would Linux with an emulator speed it up? Appreciate any advice if a virtual machine or an emulator would help my speed issues.

The Virtual Machine is running: Host OS (Windows) + [Virtual Box (or similar) + Guest OS (Linux)] + FH
The consensus seems to be that that represents a higher "[Support infrastructure]" than running it natively, so a speed gain is unlikely.

With an Emulator you are running: Host OS (Linux or BSD or whatever)+[wine (or similar)] + FH. No doubt there will be a research paper somewhere about whether this would speed things up. It is probable* that the Host OS handles resources (RAM CPU etc) more effectively and that this gain may overcome the overhead cost of Wine plus the inefficiencies of a Windows program operating under Wine. * Linux is well known for running effectively on minimal hardware.

It is also possible that if you are running other programs (email, browser, word-processing, bit of music ...) on the Non-Windows Host OS at the same time that they will run more effectively than Windows "equivalents" running under Windows. There is a view that there is less "bloat" in non Windows programs and that Linux usually manages multiple programs better than Windows 7 - not as clear cut with Windows 10/11 - and thus you will see a net gain.

But if you took ports of the above Linux programs (email, browser, word-processing, bit of music ...) and ran them under Windows 10/11 rather than MS Office etc. you would reduce the overall load and thus probably get better FH performance.

Taking steps to optimise Windows is probably a first step for pure "speed" issues and that will particularly refer to RAM usage and if you have swap file issues, Hard Disk usage - by all the programs that you are running (background processes included). Edit: if your machine is recent, the processor is unlikely to be a limiting factor.