Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

christitus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 139 posts

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#91

Post by hospitalJail »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #50
Zetobal wrote: post #29

I don't even want to install Arch the Arch way.

I don't even want to install Windows at all, yet M$ has made almost every business it's subordinate, where the businesses uncritically do what M$ demands of them while they pay M$ ungodly sums of money.

:(

My workplace uses it, but I've been able to run a few small companies from Linux only. (One is very profitable, but its a medical company, its hard not to be profitable in Medical in the US. Two are barely profitable, the others are non-profits or havent launched yet.)

LibreOffice sucks, but it still does the job. I often use google docs/drive instead.

Everything else runs on Linux, my CAD, 3D printer, my video editing, AI Art. My workflow is easier/faster without dealing with forced Windows updates and having to sort my autosaves.

I think we are at the point, Linux can be a daily driver. I'm amazed to say this, for the last 15 years, I've been critical about how hard it is to maintain a linux distro. Today, I think its harder to manage a windows install, too many forced updates and malware/bloatware that are impossible to uninstall.

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#92

Post by FireInsight »

nsonha wrote: post #84
alexvitkov wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Arch install is literally 1. partition your system 2. mount / 3. run 1 command to actually install the system 4. install grub Sure, it's a bit gatekeepy if you haven't done it before, but it teaches you a lot of useful things about how a Linux system works, that you'll undoubtedly need if you plan to use Arch.

Imagine any other consumer product boasting about teaching you things, instead of just do what it means to do. Also am I dumb? Why do I need to be taught these things again and again every damn installation?

That's because Arch is not a consumer product. It is an enthusiast Linux project, perhaps a bit too hyped up, that is usually manually installed because that's the way it is.

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#93

Post by arzig »

pyr0hu wrote: post #90
mschuster91 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mind-boggling that we have utterly basic fallback standards for storage (ATA, USB Storage Class), display (VGA), USB (xHCI), webcams (USB UVC), mice/touchpads/touchscreens/keyboards (PS/2, USB HID) or Bluetooth, with BIOS usually providing emulation layers for everything of that excluding webcams and bluetooth so you can theoretically take any modern x86 PC and hand-write a basic OS in Assembler if you want and…

I was honestly suprised that my wireless Logitech mouse with the special Logi dongle worked in the BIOS.

It’s because all the wireless magic is in the dongle. I’m not entirely sure on the details but I think it just looks like a hub with potentially multiple hid attached to the host and bios etc have had rudimentary usb hid support for ages.

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#94

Post by thfuran »

greatcircle wrote: post #13

I installed Windows 10 the other week - it kinda blew my mind how poor the install experience was. The iso contained files greater than 4GB, which breaks fat32, which I'm sure many people are still using on flash drives. So I had to use an MS cmd-line tool to split the wim files manually and edit the install files. Why doesn't the installer just use smaller archive files?

>which I'm sure many people are still using on flash drives

It's nearing twenty years since I stopped using fat32. I rather doubt that's a good assumption in the modern era.

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#95

Post by Macha »

vetinari wrote: post #78
rcxdude wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly what he's saying, except on top he's saying that rufus can supply a driver for NTFS for UEFI firmware that does not support it.

He frames it differently; more optimistic than the reality on the ground. He is also conflating things in a way that does not work (just because Intel ships something does not means that it is a standard to benchmark compliance to spec against it; it creates unnecessary confusion. Intel has a right to implement things above the spec, but it does not mean that spec mandates such things). You can ship your own filesyst…

> Most users are not going to disable SB for your snowflake of efi binary; especially if it is OS installer.

We have very different experiences, I must say. Mine is that Linux installers that do support Secure Boot are having to go out of their way to point that out to users because people are just disabling secure boot as step 0 by default.

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#96

Post by thfuran »

taway1237 wrote: post #73
antihero wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fat32, which I'm sure many people are still using on flash drives Why on earth would you do that? People have been using exFAT for many years now.

Isn't it still a default somewhere? I recently formatted a pendrive on Windows and somehow mindlessly selected FAT (and ofc had troubles down the road). I probably picked a default somewhere. And to respond your question: >Why on earth would you do that? People have been using exFAT for many years now. Most people have no idea what FAT is. If presented a choicee between FAT, exFAT, NTFS and ext4 I'm certain they don'…

>If presented a choicee between FAT, exFAT, NTFS and ext4 I'm certain they don't care, don't understand the implication, and would just click a random option

I think it would be quite rare for someone who has no idea to even be presented with such a choice in the first place.

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#98

Post by bionade24 »

thfuran wrote: post #94
greatcircle wrote: post #13

I installed Windows 10 the other week - it kinda blew my mind how poor the install experience was. The iso contained files greater than 4GB, which breaks fat32, which I'm sure many people are still using on flash drives. So I had to use an MS cmd-line tool to split the wim files manually and edit the install files. Why doesn't the installer just use smaller archive files?

>which I'm sure many people are still using on flash drives It's nearing twenty years since I stopped using fat32. I rather doubt that's a good assumption in the modern era.

At least in Germany all cheap USB sticks sold to average consumers in stores are still FAT32. I highly doubt they format different fs for different countries, the printing on the packaging indicates they're all sold EU-wide.

FAT32 is still very dominant & I wonder why Microsoft & Apple don't push the vendors to use exFAT. Users unaware of filesystems won't need their stick being recognized by the UEFI, but they will have files > 4GB.

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#99

Post by AshamedCaptain »

vetinari wrote: post #66
voltagex_ wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Rufus author has capital O Opinions on this: https://github.com/pbatard/rufus/wiki/FAQ#user-content-Blah_...

He is wrong; UEFI does specify FAT (section 13.3). It does not prevent supporting other filesystems, as well as other partition schemes or volume formats (nothing prevents UEFI from supporting LVM, for example), but only FAT and GPT are mandatory (i.e. "must"). Thus only FAT and GPT are implemented in 100% of shipped computers. Yes, you can get Intel NUC and yes, it does support NTFS in UEFI. It is also compliant wit…

And the only reason some UEFI implementsions support NTFS is as usual because of MS's monopoly. They don't have to specify it as the standard, it just becomes one.

Heck, NTFS is more commonly supported on UEFI implementstions than exFAT is, even when there is no free (as in gratis) implementation of the former, but there are several for the latter.

Re: Install Windows the Arch Linux Way

#100

Post by bionade24 »

Perz1val wrote: post #41
vladvasiliu wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh, I don't have any love for windows, but IME newish versions seem quite well-behaved regarding Linux. Sure, they'll rewrite the UEFI boot order, but once you set it back to what you want, it leaves it alone. The one thing I absolutely hate, is the recovery partition at the end of the main C: drive. So that if you want to grow the C drive, you have to jump through some ridiculous hoops to move the recovery partitio…

A friend of mine recently installed windows to another drive (I hadn't had the chance to tell him to unplug every other drive) and sure enough, it did install with all of the funny partitions elsewhere. We though it will be easily fixable afterwards, but it's not - you cannot recreate it. With those gone the system cannot hibernate and it couldn't shut down until disabling fast startup. Updates don't work either, but…

I made the same mistake recently, Windows now uses the EFI partition on the Linux drive. But I don't have any of the problems listed. Not shutting down seems more like some ACPI issue to me.

My only problem is that BIOS updates delete the systemd-boot efistub, probably caused by the vendor only having exceptions for the Windows bootloader and GRUB.

Post reply on HN