What's the problem here? That's how I started with Linux.
108ReplyIdk seems like gatekeeping to me. Why don't they wipe their disk and install Arch like real sigma linux users?
64ReplyThen get traumatized after having to wipe the entire system again because some package rendered the bootloader or the system completely useless.
12ReplyWhy stop there? Can you even call yourself computer literate if you can't manually flip the bits in your RAM to perform basic tasks?
9Reply
I don't even think VMs were a thing when I started. I remember dual booting back to Windows to google shit to fix drivers then then back 😂
10ReplyTechnically VMs are older than Windows, but it was not super accessible in the 90s and early 00s which is when I'm guessing you were doing this.
2ReplyWhat's this "Google" thing you speak of? Back in my days you bought a huge book which came with a red hat or mandrake CD-ROM.
2Reply
Permanently Deleted
95ReplyThe repetitive summary alone deserves all the downvotes
7ReplyIt allows people to keep using windows. If they had no alternative, they would install Linux natively
-7ReplyIf they had no alternative, they would stick with Windows.
8ReplyDon't be an elitist douche, dude. Weaning people off of windows is a valid strategy.
6Reply
when you do it this way, it's foss, when you do it the other way around, it's piracy
society
88ReplyAnd if you do it the correct way it's WSL2.
-26Replythe correct way is to install linux on bare metal and not use windows at all
70ReplyI don't usually downvote on Lemmy, but this is a real test of willpower.
19Reply
What's with the 19 👎️ in that pic? I guess people really do hate Oracle.
56ReplyProbably stuck up Linux users mad that someone wants to virtualize a distro instead of just installing it bare metal.
13Reply
This is why people hate Linux nerds. Thanks.
37ReplyEh, that's still a decent gateway drug
36ReplyDon't even need virtual box. You can just install Linux directly on Windows using what they call "WSL" (Windows subsystem for Linux)
11ReplyThey're doing it the wrong way round, VBox was actual garbage on Windows the last time I tried it. On Linux it just works and on Windows I considered myself lucky whenever something worked.
9ReplyYes, Linux (maybe it's just an Ubuntu problem) does not run well in Virtual box. I could get it to boot 1/10 times and was quite unstable. But that was two years ago, maybe things have changed
1ReplyInteresting. Linux runs fine in Linux (in a virtual box, or other similar visualising mechanism). I realise I've never tried VirtualBox in Windows.
2ReplyVirtualBox+HyperV runs Linux horribly - the "this shit is unbootable" kind of horribly.
If you disable HyperV and use VirtualBox's default hypervisor, it at least boots and you can interact with the desktop environment. But it's still slow.
1Reply
I’d love to run Linux as the primary env, but without a second GPU for GPU passthrough windows is basically useless for gaming.
So for now windows is the primary environment
8ReplyI stuck with Windows for the longest time because of gaming, but for my needs that's no longer necessary. If it's been a while since you tried Steam on Linux you might want to give it another try.
13ReplyI play games that are almost exclusively not Linux compatible. CoD, Destiny 2 and iRacing are all still windows only and they’re about all I play
7Reply
I don't get it? I first experienced Linux on Virtual Box (back when it was by Sun Microsystems, somewhere in 2011)
This is a really good way of introducing people to desktop Linux, it's miles better than telling them to run WSL /etc
I'm sorry but this is just... Toxic?
7ReplyCan you install Linux, to install windows, which has a copy of Linux installed? I assume the only end system resources?
4ReplyHere's Windows running in Virtualbox on Linux, which is running in Virtualbox on Windows.
6ReplyYou'd need nested virtualization enabled on your CPU, but yup, you can do it.
1Reply
I hope today is Opposite day!
2ReplyVmware? eww
1Replygross
0Reply