XP will not connect to wired network

Sorry, off-topic I know but can I ask which VM you use on Puppy? I've been wanting to run XP in a VM on one of my machines and I was planning on using the Oracle VM under Oracle Linux but I'd much rather use something like Puppy as the host OS.

 

I am using VirtualBox which I have had good results with using either Puppy Linux Tahr,Xenial or Bionic 64 bit OS's I do have to load the particular kernel sources to compile the vboxdrv but that's only once. I like the seamless mode .. the XP vm is fast and responsive

 

There's a VirtualBox SFS package that is easy to load as well

 

I must try "Puppy" one of these days. I used LINUX MINT to verify that my hardware is all OK.
My problem is that I updated the hardware, had to completely reinstall Windows XP, and now XP won't connect to the internet. Any ideas??

 

The simplest enough solution should be installing the proper drivers for your ethernet card, and/or WiFi card/adapter/dongle. Up until a few years ago, there were XP drivers still being made for nearly every device on the market (and those drivers should still be readily available to download). If you can identify the model names/numbers for the devices on your current motherboard, this should decomplicate matters considerably.

 

Thank you, and I guess that was the problem. Yesterday, I fired up XP and windows gave me an alert that it had updated (something), and the hardware was now ready for use. Sure enough, I tried installing some utilities, and it got online ...... I will never understand why the driver did not load initially, but then, after several startups, it loaded the driver ...... PS: the plug for the cable is on the MOBO ! ! !

 

I just discovered that Internet Explorer WOULD NOT grab the WEB, but Comodo Dragon (browser) gets online just fine - I've heard it's best not to use IE anyway, so I dumped it.

 

You're welcome! I'm glad everything worked out for you! Depending on what kind of hardware you've got, it should be possible to use a high-end modern browser. My personal recommendations are Firefox 52.9.1ESR, SeaMonkey 2.49.5 (an unofficial build by WG9), MyPal 28.4.0 (or whatever the latest version is now)...essentially, anything forked from the Gecko 52 codebase. Then again, if Comodo is doing all you need it to do, no reason not to stick with it!

 

MX Linux 17.1 is the easiest to learn/use for an XP-expat (of the various Linux distros).

 

Of the 20+ Linux distros I tried out, Puppy Linux is one of those that I could not even get to connect to the internet. I gave up trying after about 20 minutes of fussing with it. For someone that knows Linux already, it's probably fine and dandy....for an XP user, Puppy bites. Of those I gave a test-drive, only three so far connected to the internet automatically. Linux Mint, MX Linux, and TAILS. Between Linux Mint and MX Linux, the latter is easier to learn and use due to the way it's setup (Linux Mint requires you to go looking for stuff). As for TAILS, only one version automatically connected to the internet....unfortunately I got no clue which version it is. I had tried two versions before the one I now use, and both were useless on my old computer.

 

Just putting in my plug for LINUX - use a browser to bring up DISTROWATCH .... sounds funny but it keeps WATCH on DISTRObutions. Currently, the 3 most popular, in order are - MANJARO, MX LINUX, and MINT.
MANJARO works somewhat like a cellphone, i.e. Windows 8; MINT is still my favorite as it works much like any MS WINDOWS.
LINUX distributions are generally very stable, lean, fast, and virus free - since there are so few LINUX systems out there, I imagine the virus a--hol-- can't be bothered with them.
I haven't tried MX, but UBUNTU, number 5, is still a great system, with the only difference of note is putting the "bottom" bar on the side (I think).
Also note, that you can download any of these, transfer it to a DVD, load and run it FROM the DVD, and if you decide to install it, you can WIPE your hard drive, OR load and run it alongside WINDOWS.
LINUX will modify your MBR to bring up a small list, and you'll have 10 seconds to decide which system you want ..... OK I'm a little hazy on this part ....

 

In looking at the LINUX systems available, I was particularly taken with ZORIN OS - it says it was designed to look and work pretty much like windows and even has a corner to let you run some windows programs.
It is based on UBUNTU.

 

After the Ubuntu foray into corporate malware territory, it will be a long time before I would trust them any further than that Deepin distro. For any distro primarily based on Ubuntu, I'd have to look into finding out if it has the same nasties:
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/05/this-is-the-data-ubuntu-collects-about-your-system
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/07/stallman_on_ubuntu_spyware/
before I would consider it. Linux Mint and MX Linux look to be 'safe', as does AntiX, and of course TAILS is about as safe as one can get...even if the TLAs are obsessed with its users. Not yet tried AntiX. When I found MX Linux I sort of cut way back on the test drives. Linux Mint was the last one I tested. By the way all of these distros have video reviews on Youtube where it's not only reviewed but taken for a spin where one can see what it has and get a basic idea of how it operates.

 

Rather shocking! I had no idea.
I guess Debian may be a possible, and one might want to have a look at SOLUS.
SOLUS is a standalone .... apparently written from scratch
I personally have not tried it, and it has been years since I tried DEBIAN,
which has probably improved.
I wonder also if systems BASED on UBUNTU would have nasties, or if they only BASE their systems on it???

 

Ubuntu has supposedly either removed it, or left it deactivated by default, depending on who you ask. My view on that is they only did this because of the backlash, and if they did it once, they are likely to slip it in again. I recall the hue and cry that arose when M$ first unveiled Palladium, which caused them to shelf it til the stink died down, then out it came, under the alias NGSCB....stuffed into Vista. Once a corporation has proven its disdain for the enduser, my trust remains in short supply thereafter.

MX Linux is Debian based, and as said, it's my pick of the litter for ease of use by XP users ().
AnitX is likely the next distro I'll test drive, as these vids intrigue me :


Solus is another I never got to, but here are reviews:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh-kA5aHi7Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuNE3OrZTWs
Whether or not a Ubuntu-based distro would have its nasties would depend on the degree to which its based, and how much 'tweaking' the developer did. I'm just now teaching myself Linux, so nowhere near the skill level to say. You would probably have to ask at linuxquestions.org forum, as to whether any particular Ubuntu-based distro is 'safe'. I'm sure someone there would know.

 

Getting excited to experiment with both MX LINUX, and SOLUS ..... not sure which version(s) to try, as the explanations are vague, but anyway.
One BIG question is a BOOT MANAGER. I had been (occasionally) running Linux MINT 17, and managed to get a SUPER BOOT MANAGER working, but apparently it is an old program and won't work with MINT 19.
Asking on the MINT Forum, I was told ..... too old, better try GRUB2.
Wellll, not knowing how to program linux, that doesn't help.
Can any tell me - assuming I'm running Windows (10 on one machine, XP on the other), and I then install MX or SOLUS to run alongside it, - how can I set up a NICE boot manager to choose which system I want to run???

 

I use MX Linux 17.1, that I got a year or so ago. Now version 18 is out. Here are its reviews:




No idea about the boot manager.....I have separate HDDs for XP and MX LInux. No way I would risk my XP Pro with dual boot anything. For MX Linux, I'd suggest you run it as a LiveCD to play around with it. First thing is to read the FAQ and Users Manual (get to both via the MX Welcome screen), which will eliminate a lot of potential future frustrations. You can also look over the Users Manual here: https://mxlinux.org/manuals/. Anything not covered can be asked and answered at the forum (https://mxlinux.org/forum/).

I did find this on dual boot~ , but I'd not try it....I fanatically guard-dog XP Pro!

 

I really don't understand why you couldn't get connected with Puppy. Most of the newer Pups connect automatically on first boot, without even needing any configuration.

I used XP for 13 years; before that, 95, 98, 2000 & ME. Within 10 minutes of booting my first Puppy I'd got the browser up-and-running, and was well into installing stuff from the package manager.

Be that as it may, the whole point of Linux is that there's so much choice, you would be very unusual if you couldn't find one to suit you. They're completely free (the General Public Licence sees to that), so download a bunch and try 'em. You don't need to install; virtually all Linux distros will let you try 'em out in Live mode, running from the DVD (CD in Puppy's case, given how small it is).

The one downside for Windows users is that you are expected to put a bit more effort into getting them set up the way you want them. As I said, they're free.....but you also have to remember that 95 % of the people who work on developing Linux software do so in their spare time, because they want to; it's not a paid, 9-5 job like Microsoft's developers. And because it's free, they don't 'owe' you anything. They don't have a 'duty' to make sure something works 100% on every possible hardware combination.

I generally find that the folks who shout loudest about the differences are those who figure that if THEY can't make something work, then what hope is there for anybody else..? These are often the same kinda people who couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery, if everything was put on a plate in front of 'em.....!

-------------------------------------

With regard to running Windows software in Linux, there's usually two approaches. If you just want to run the odd program/app, WINE is the best approach. It sets up a 'real-time' Windows environment inside a container, and software will run inside that.

If you want the full Windows experience, then a VM is the way to go. Just bear in mind that for a VM you need a fairly powerful CPU, with virtualization instructions, and buckets of fast, last-gen (or newer) RAM. At least DDR3......and at least 8, preferably 16 GB. Minimum.


Mike.

 

Puppy was likely the earliest Linux distro I tried. There was two versions I had...the 4.2.1 Deep Thought, and a later one. Unfortunately the later one is MIA, and I don't recall which version it was. I just ordered the new edition of MX Linux 18.2, along with AntiX 17.4.1, but maybe next month I'll give Puppy another try, if I can figure out which one to buy (https://www.osdisc.com/products/puppy). Advice? I'm always keen to test-drive distros, or give them another shot, as MX Linux and TAILS have made me a fan.

Your experience with Puppy mirrors mine with MX Linux and TAILS. Browsers were ready to go out of the box, and online within five minutes of boot-up. So many distros failed that most basic test, around twenty in fact. Only MX Linux, Linux Mint, and my present mysterious version of TAILS passed. All the others required fussing with. Too much fussing with. At the very least, any distro should be able to get online 'automagically', without needing the enduser to jump through hoops, or have much Linux knowledge. After that, the rest should be either very intuitive and easy to figure out, or else loads of instructionals should be within reach. Way too many distros seem to have the attitude that Windows users should be willing if not eager to walk that extra mile (or ten miles), to use Linux. On one hand they pine for the proverbial 'Day of Linux', and whine that Windows users don't give it a chance, then turn around and make it as difficult as possible, while wondering why the converts don't come pouring in. That's fine for SUSE or Arch or some other specialist distro, but not for those wooing Windows expats. Just because Linux developers work for free, does not mean Windows users "owe" them anything either. You want to compete with M$? You want to steal some of their users? Golly gee, guess that means you actually have to compete with M$! A few distros comprehend this....most have no clue.

MX Linux does it for me, instead of me having to handhold it. Almost as important, its reasonably intuitive beyond that. Case in point is the recent Firefox crap, where they appear to be forcing users to upgrade to their most recent crappy version, or eschew their addons. I immediately started looking for a new browser, and found Waterfox, which I'm using right now. Downloading it into MX Linux required a couple of attempts, but was not that awful....seems like the developers have some understanding of how Windows users think, and it's this intuitiveness that puts the distro a step above.

 

@ trimis:-

Y'know, there's absolutely no need to buy Puppy at all. It's simple to download, and very easy to put on disc yourself. The app we always recommend to Windows users for this purpose is BurnCDCC, from TeraByte Unlimited:-

https://www.terabyteunlimited.com/downloads-free-software.htm

Second item on the page.

It does one thing.....and one thing only; it 'burns' an ISO image to an optical disc. That's ALL it does, so you can't really go wrong with it. And it doesn't even need installing; it comes as a .zip file, which you can unzip to literally anywhere you want to.....and it will run from there.

------------------------------------

The ease of getting online was one of the main things I liked about Puppy from the word go; as you say, it's one of those 'essential' features which can 'make it or break it' for many people. It was always envisaged as a 'refuge' for folks who were getting fed-up with Windows, to which end Barry K made certain it was packed with tooltips and wizards to guide the beginner every step of the way.

At the same time, BK was wise enough to realise that not all Windows users wanted to give M$ the boot, so he always gave this advice, echoed by many Puppy Forum members to this day; keep Windows for the 'serious' stuff, but use Puppy for fun. Play around with it. Enjoy it. Which I did myself for around 18 months or so, until I finally came to the realization that everything I did on a regular basis (and even many of those 'occasional' tasks) could be achieved with Puppy.....and I didn't actually need Windows any more. So I bade good-bye to XP.....and haven't looked back since. (If I'm honest, I find I don't even miss it any more.)

I will never presume to try and 'push' Linux onto anyone.....but I'm always keen to make people aware that there ARE 'easy-to-use' alternatives out there, which don't require jumping through lots of hoops. As for MX Linux, I used its sibling Anti-X until fairly recently, and, like MX itself, I'd recommend it as a thoroughly sensible XP 'replacement'; easy-to-use, and very easy to set-up. The reasons I switched to Puppy were various; it runs well on my old desktop (which itself is approaching the 15-yr old mark), it's lightweight, and doesn't demand much in the way of resources, but the MAIN one was simple.....because the mainstream distros were all dropping support for older hardware.

Which Puppy will never do.

Linux, TBH, isn't any 'better' or 'worse' than Windows.......but it IS, very decidedly, 'different'. And some people find it easier to make that transition than others do (I have to agree with you, too many Linux developers have a rather 'snotty' attitude in this respect). I can't knock anyone for wanting to stay with something with which they're on familiar ground, and know what they're doing.....but XP is fast approaching the stage where it's just no longer safe in as far as internet-facing apps (browsers, e-mail, IRC and instant messaging clients, etc) are concerned. Yes, keep it for non-internet activities by all means (there will never be a problem doing that), but disconnect it from the network, and instead run a Linux distro alongside it for internet stuff. Puppy's ideal for this, because it's so small, and can be run from a USB stick.

Which should give you the best of both worlds..!

---------------------------------------------

As to which Puppy, well, it depends to a large extent on your hardware. If you have an even vaguely modern set-up (like, in the last 10 years or so), I would recommend Xenialpup 7.5 (32- or 64-bit, the choice is yours). It's based on the last-but-one Ubuntu Long Term Support release, 'Xenial Xerus', and is by now rock-solid, and completely stable. If, however, you're running something like a P4 or similar, I would recommend Precise 5.7.1, BK's last 'official' Puppy before he handed over the reins to the community; it's fast becoming accepted by the community as the Puppy to use for older hardware. It's the one I use myself on my 17-yr old, P4-powered Dell 1100 laptop, and it runs like a dream.

You can find the ISO downloads here (these are direct links):-

'Precise' 5.7.1 - http://distro.ibiblio.org/quirky/precise-5.7.1/precise-5.7.1.iso

Xenialpup 7.5:-

32-bit - http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/puppy-xenial/32/xenialpup-7.5-uefi.iso

64-bit - http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/puppy-xenial/64/xenialpup64-7.5-uefi.iso

The Xenials will run with UEFI-enabled hardware, but require the 'Legacy Boot' option to be selected in the BIOS, or what passes for it. It also helps to disable 'FastBoot', too (the 'hibernation' thing).

Hope those help.


Mike.