Hmm, it could have to do with your use case being more CPU/GPU intensive under Ubuntu than what you are comparing it to. For instance a default driver under the specific linux distro not being perfectly uptimized for your hardware, so there's more overhead in certain tasks, which in turn means higher CPU/GPU usage, higher temps and revving up the fan.
Boxes is basically a VM manager. You can't install Windows but I have used t for several Linux VM's to try before I run. For Windows you can use VBox or VMWare.
Theres no reason why it shouldn't run windows, its just a front end to libvirt.
.. unless im completely wrong?
edit: works fine, just booted windows 10 in gnome-boxes using qemu/kvm backend
1 Like
+1 for fedora.
you could try korora also, it has alot of exras built in for ease of use, all you really need to do after install is install fedy (folkswithhats.org) and then add plugins too firefox/browser.
My apologies. The last time I tried, it did not work. I also booted up Win 8 in boxes.
I use Ubuntu. But, in your case I would recommend Fedora. They are very big on security to the point I won't run it.
1 Like
Well normally on my desktop I am not bothered about security too much, as its built for gaming only really (Plus AV is a waste of cash).
And while I trust Linux in its default form enough to do what I need, I need that extra security just to stop something that may come through (although its all Windows based so that doesn't say much)
All this is the reason for GRSec, SELinux, and some AV systems, I may try out some software IPS/IDS if there open source.
But also why wont you use them if they are so secure? surely that is a good thing
@Eden + @Miguel_Sensacion
Whats the resouces like on boxes for Windows 7? I only have 8GB in the laptop atm but will be pushing to 16GB.
I may try it over KVM or something else :), also do they support virtual drives from the likes of virtual box and VMWare? just easy if I need the VM else where :)
Thanks
So I have been doing some thinking and research on different distros (I have hopped between loads before)
So the contenders are Fedora (Or Korora) and Arch (More than likely Antergos), Debian is also in the running and maybe CentOS (Just enable the ELRepo)
I have already outlined the needs, Good Security, Stability and the ability to tweak some specific software.
Fedora is a very high contender, Arch while good maybe out of the running due to its instability nature (Changing parts not breaking them) which creates downtime, creates time where I get more stressed out, I could only upgrade on the weekend but I don't want to be having to push back security updates for convinience (There is a tool called Pacmatic but may not be enough).
CentOS is as we all know the Stable Fedora, and free RHEL, this is also a good contender if I can figure out how the heck to update the kernel to a newer LTS (I would like online patching), RHEL may also be an option but cost is a bit of an annoyance.
Debian is a very good contender also, apt isn't difficult to use, kernel upgrading is easy, its super stable and I believe they have GRSec in their repos, if not it is maintained in a repo.
I think personally its running between Fedora and Debian, the only thing that is against Fedora is the upgrading every 12 months, and then the stability of the upgrade, and the extra software repo avaliability after, which could risk security more.
Arch can give me a constant system but may provide hick ups (Although I hear there few and far between)
Debian as we know is rock solid by name, and could be the in 2nd in the race.
Why cant we just have 1 distro for this thing! lol
I used to run Fedora at work but found my self in need of more bleeding edge stuff so I decided to give Arch Linux a shot, now I have no intention of changing my distro. I really like Arch, but I understand the concerns you have with downtime, however IMHO Arch is stable as long as you know how to set it up. I'm running it on all my machines ( yes even my server... I like to live dangerously, ok? :P ) and I've never had a single problem.
The choice of distro is so individual and there is no right or wrong, some will argue that Arch is not so complete and that you have to do everything yourself. This is true, but this is also how many people want it. If you are however looking for a stable easy to use and fairly complete system why not give Ubuntu a shot? There is no shame in using it, it works so why not? Or if you already are looking at Fedora I think you should use it, see if it suits you; otherwise you can always switch.
For me the real problem is Desktop Enviroment... but that is another story.
Arch is stable so lomg as you know what your doing and you keep up with there 'news' section on their website. But it's not a contender in my opinion because it lacks the security aspect.
Arch is made for arch devs in mind, while this is aligns quite well with many people it means it lacks I'm areas like proper change control and any secuirty focus. It's up to you to ensure its built how you need it.
1 Like
Okay so lets say Fedora, would you use Fedora or Korora (To say it skips some steps out).
As I say my main concerns are around upgrade time with the repos needing time to catch up.
1 Like
I've no expert's with korora. I use fedora 23 with rpmfusion repos installed and negativo17 repo for nvidia drivers.
When it comes to updating to feodra 24 for example. The only thing you really need to wait for is rpmfusion repos to update. They have been a little slow to rebuild for release bwcuae of infrastructure changes ongoing but feodra 23 will be supported up to and just after fedora 15 at least so there's no rush to update as soon as fedora 24 hits.
Actual updating is pretty painless for my experience with the new package manager
I'm Fedora 23 on al machines now and in different scenarios. I don't use flash but I do have thr free/nonfree rpm repos. It suits all my needs. There's only one software I had an issue with [ Sublime ] and that was resolved on github. I honestly feel like its a very well rounded distro.
It's just out of convenience. I've had problems installing drivers and other things because of Selinux. I figured out how to set it to permissive. I don't do any online banking because my bank is two blocks away. When I shop, I use a debit card with the minimum plus the amount needed for the purchase. Even if my information on the card is stolen, they won't be able to do anything with it. Other than that, all I do is play games and use my web browser. Ubuntu does just fine with that:)
Plus, Fedora I believe works better in a commercial environment. That's what it is designed for.
I've started to really take a liking to Arch and I've been running it for a few months now. At my work they have an enterprise image of Windows 7 that we basically just got last year (yes I'm serious) and there is NO option to run linux at all in any way, shape, or form within the environment. We have unix and linux servers, but I would say windows probably has the majority of our environment covered. Active Directory is huge, most applications solely rely on it for user access.
But I'm a power user, and I hate people telling me that I can't do something "because they said so", and luckily I have local admin on my machine. So I run Arch Linux in a VM, and while I unfortunately can't use it primarily, it does get a lot of use. Anything that I can do in the VM I try to do there, mainly because the more I use something linux based the happier I am. I used to write shell scripts on one of our DMZ jump servers because it's really the only place I could, but with the VM I do it all there instead, and then test it in our environment after I'm done to make sure it's still compatible. When it comes to kind of work I do, linux has so so so many powerful tools that I just can't live without. I far prefer shell scripting to bat files, it's so much easier to read, write, and just run overall. I ran into a situation today where a bat file called an exe, and the exe failed to run HORRIBLY (.NET runtime error logged in the Application event log), but guess what? errorlevel was still 0, so the script kept going. The business was not happy. Pretty sure that wouldn't happen if you were doing it in linux/unix...
I don't know exactly what they've done to the windows 7 image but oh my god is it slow as FUCK. I swapped out the hard drive for an SSD and upped it from 4GB to 16GB of ram and it's still slow as hell! This of course also slows down my VM because apparently there's something on there that just absolutely cripples the disk performance, but it still works pretty well. I've also tried to make a DD image of the disk and spin it up using QEMU but I can't get windows to boot, it just blue screens. :( If I could run it in a VM, and run linux as the main OS, I 100% would. That would resolve all my performance problems for sure, the machine is fast when I boot a live ISO, it's relatively capable for an HP Elitebook 840 G1 with the i5 in it.
After writing all this I've realized that I've mostly ranted about the fact that I "can't" use linux at work, but if I had the ability to, I would probably use Arch because I do like it a lot, but I'd also have no problem using something Debian based, openSUSE (I've ran that before), or Fedora. Arch has been very stable for me despite being bleeding edge. I'm always running the latest kernel RC.
We are the exact same with who we are contracted to.
The Windows images we get are like lightning but as soon as we connect to the domain (We need it for our logins) it slows down, sometimes log in manager doesnt even work, and if your off the network god help you, seen a system take 5 mins to log in just because of this.
We also cannot remove Windows 7 for compatability reasons, their systems run on 7 so we need to also.
They also are heavily reliant on SCCM/AD and a system called Quest for deployment, all this is of course controlled via group policy system as so are our systems (Although we have full admin access)
Reason I still need Windows is because of Citrix Reciever, we need it to access remote servers (SCCM/AD, Backup servers for each site etc) MS Outlook I could live without, I could use Thunderbird or OWA, rest of office we only use for documents (Support hardly write them)
The way I am doing it is using my own Lenovo X220 which to be honest could flatten this i5 HP if it wanted to with Windows on it, nevermind a heavily optimized Linux system, with a VM for Windows 7, although I may just remote desktop to my HP then RDP over to the servers (Use it as a key for Citrixs gate).
And at least you can upgrade your own laptops, where not even supposed to service ours outside of fixing Windows issues, so much for IT Engineer eh :P
But I have thought about Arch Linux, and I have been reading up on making it more stable and all it seems to be is just wait a while til upgrading (I would only upgrade on weekends unless it was a critical security fix).
I also ran Korora last night after Debian decided to keep crashing on me, Korora seems to have mouse issues.
I think I will just run Antergos (Just so I don't have to fix up X org with flickering external display) and tune it for performance and battery life.
For stability you really can't go wrong with a debian based distro.
You could try LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition), comes with cinnamon and I believe xfce, rock solid, my boss uses it and prefers it over its ubuntu derivative
One thing that could be improved is showing people how to use SELinux, it doesnt need to be turned off.
On the other hand, it did its job. You tried to install 3rd party untrusted software into non default locations, it stopped you. Thats exactly what its supposed to do, so malicious programs dont fuck things up.
I cant recommend avoiding Arch enough for critical systems unless you want to put in the proper maintenance time. There's no support around it what so ever. Its not just a case of waiting a week for packages to be stable, you have to wait untill users have stopped saying things have broke then update, which since its rolling release theres no guarantee the next thing wont break.
essentially you have to keep an eye on the main site https://www.archlinux.org/ and the forums for people saying theres package breakages.
Thats not to say it happens often, as it generally doesnt if your on the stable release. But when they update system braking packages, you get a note on the front page. Thats it.
Give it a go, but put it through some serious testing before switching your production system to it. (this include antergos)
1 Like
I use Linux Mint for work. It works with everything that I want it to out of the box and has been suitably stable enough for me to run updates daily without worrying whether it would break anything. It's even been more dependable than Ubuntu LTS from my experience.
OpenVPN, LAMP, Git, Ansible, PIP, Apache Ant with mods, JDK, Sublime Text, Slack.. pretty much anything I need to install just runs without any OS-specific tweaking.
I've never compared it with Fedora, however.