is there a guide for how to use an ereader in linux?

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Trust me, I can say what I said. I had XP on my computer and now I have Windows 7. Same computer. So yes, Windows 7 is faster.

I'm not denying that Windows 7 is faster on your computer, or any computer that was manufactured over the past few years. The issue is with older computers: computers with less RAM, with video drivers that don't support Windows new graphics architecture, lack hyperthreading or multiple cores, and so forth.

Think of it this way: if Windows was getting unconditionally faster, then people would be able to run it on lesser and lesser hardware. That most certainly isn't the case. What is happening is that newer versions of Windows are taking advantage of new features and greater resources in order to improve performance. Older versions of Windows couldn't do that because of built-in assumptions (e.g. limited RAM) or because the features simply did not exist when it was developed. This means that recent versions of Windows will be faster than XP on newer hardware. It also means that recent versions of Windows will be slower on older hardware, if it works at all.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Obviously you didn't read what I wrote. I wrote to use Classic Start Menu with Windows 8.1 and then Gregg doesn't have to use the Metro interlace if he doesn't want to. He'll have a proper start menu. Windows 8.1 runs well with Classic Start Menu.

The other option is to learn how to deal with the Start Screen. I never understood why people hate it so deeply that they reject Windows 8.x altogether. For starters, Windows 8.x has improvements that most people can benefit from. As for the Start Screen, you can simply treat it as a program launcher if all of your software runs on the classic desktop (and if you hate Metro, you're probably going to stick to classic desktop software anyhow). Just launch your program and you're done with it. Heck, just pin your programs to the taskbar and you'll rarely even see the Start Screen.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

The other option is to learn how to deal with the Start Screen. I never understood why people hate it so deeply that they reject Windows 8.x altogether. For starters, Windows 8.x has improvements that most people can benefit from. As for the Start Screen, you can simply treat it as a program launcher if all of your software runs on the classic desktop (and if you hate Metro, you're probably going to stick to classic desktop software anyhow). Just launch your program and you're done with it. Heck, just pin your programs to the taskbar and you'll rarely even see the Start Screen.

But if you install Classic Start Menu, you have the best of both worlds. You can use Metro and you can use the Start Menu. No limits. And it all runs very well.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

I'm not denying that Windows 7 is faster on your computer, or any computer that was manufactured over the past few years. The issue is with older computers: computers with less RAM, with video drivers that don't support Windows new graphics architecture, lack hyperthreading or multiple cores, and so forth.

Think of it this way: if Windows was getting unconditionally faster, then people would be able to run it on lesser and lesser hardware. That most certainly isn't the case. What is happening is that newer versions of Windows are taking advantage of new features and greater resources in order to improve performance. Older versions of Windows couldn't do that because of built-in assumptions (e.g. limited RAM) or because the features simply did not exist when it was developed. This means that recent versions of Windows will be faster than XP on newer hardware. It also means that recent versions of Windows will be slower on older hardware, if it works at all.

The reason you cannot run newer Windows on old hardware is that you need to have certain processor features. So processors that ran XP might not be able to run Windows 8.1. It's called PROGRESS. Do you want to buy new hardware to find that your OS doesn't make use of it? No, you don't.

[Shades]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The reason you cannot run newer Windows on old hardware is that you need to have certain processor features. So processors that ran XP might not be able to run Windows 8.1. It's called PROGRESS. Do you want to buy new hardware to find that your OS doesn't make use of it? No, you don't.

But then why can't the OS make use of new features when they are there and not use those features when they're not? Oh, that's just planned obsolescence on the part of the OS, isn't it.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Shades

But then why can't the OS make use of new features when they are there and not use those features when they're not? Oh, that's just planned obsolescence on the part of the OS, isn't it.

Because a lot of newer software won't work on older hardware like processors without SSE2. So instead of causing all kinds of hassles, it's just easier to make the OS run on recent processors and then you don't have a support nightmare.

Current versions Calibre and Sigil will not install on XP because a lot of XP installations are running on too old hardware. It would be support nightmares to allow them to be installed.

[Gregg Bell]

This notion that my computer's hardware isn't sufficient to run the latest versions of Sigil and Calibre and QT5. Is this for absolute certain? Because, as I said, my computer works great as it is. It meets all my needs. But if I'm not going to be able to use the latest versions of Sigil and Calibre, yeah, that would be a problem.

I would get a newer computer, probably a refurbished Dell with Windows 7 on it but what kind of specs (hard drive, RAM, processor speed, etc.) am I going to need to comfortably run QT5 and the newer versions of software (at least for the foreseeable future)?

[KevinBurke]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

My advice is to use Windows. It's so much easier then Linux when it comes to eBooks and DRM removal.

He could always run a version if windows in a virtual machine that supports USB passthrough in Linux.

*edit* Nevermind, I just went through the thread and found out his hardware specs are obsolete so the virtual machine is a bad idea *edit*

Personally, I don't like Linux I think the code quality is low and it is full of cheap little hacks that just happen to run.

I have two Thinkpad laptops : one with Windows 7 and one with OpenBSD. OpenBSD has calibre and I can use my ereader as a generic usb storage device, under OpenBSD, but for various reasons, including DRM removal, it is just better to use my ereader with my windows laptop.

Originally Posted by wikipedia.org

OpenBSD is a Unix-like computer operating system descended from Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD), a Research Unix derivative developed at the University of California, Berkeley. It was forked from NetBSD by project leader Theo de Raadt in late 1995. As well as the operating system, the OpenBSD Project has produced portable versions of numerous subsystems, most notably PF, OpenSSH and OpenNTPD, which are very widely available as packages in other operating systems.

The project is also widely known for the developers' insistence on open-source code and quality documentation, uncompromising position on software licensing, and focus on security and code correctness. The project is coordinated from de Raadt's home in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Its logo and mascot is a pufferfish named Puffy.

OpenBSD includes a number of security features absent or optional in other operating systems, and has a tradition in which developers audit the source code for software bugs and security problems. The project maintains strict policies on licensing and prefers the open-source BSD licence and its variants. In the past this has led to a comprehensive license audit and moves to remove or replace code under licences found less acceptable.

As with most other BSD-based operating systems, the OpenBSD kernel and userland programs, such as the shell and common tools like cat and ps, are developed together in one source code repository. Third-party software is available as binary packages or may be built from source using the ports tree. Also like most modern BSD operating systems, it is capable of running binary code compiled for Linux in a compatible computer architecture at full speed in compatibility mode.

The OpenBSD project maintains ports for 20 different hardware platforms, including the DEC Alpha, Intel i386, Hewlett-Packard PA-RISC, x86-64 and Motorola 68000 processors, Apple's PowerPC machines, Sun SPARC and SPARC64-based computers, the VAX and the Sharp Zaurus.[1] The OpenBSD Foundation was accepted as a mentoring organization for Google Summer of Code 2014.

....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenBSD

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I'm not talking about Linux. I'm saying his computer is too old to properly run current versions of Sigil and Calibre. If the hardware cannot run the software, t matters not what OS is in use.

Why do you believe his computer is too old to "properly" run the current versions of Sigil and Calibre? I know for certain it will run the newest version of Calibre -- I'm using Calibre 2.14 (yesterday's -- 12-26 -- release) on a computer with almost identical specs without issues. Have no idea about Sigil (I don't use it) but if QT5 is the necessary requirement, I know Xubuntu 14.04 has QT5 support in its repository.

I guess I'm trying to figure out where you came to your conclusions about what Gregg's computer is incapable of running Calibre and Sigil.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Trust me, I can say what I said. I had XP on my computer and now I have Windows 7. Same computer. So yes, Windows 7 is faster.

I'm guessing your computer is not 12 years old.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Obviously you didn't read what I wrote. I wrote to use Classic Start Menu with Windows 8.1 and then Gregg doesn't have to use the Metro interlace if he doesn't want to. He'll have a proper start menu. Windows 8.1 runs well with Classic Start Menu.

Dell is a retail brand.

I'll take your word for it -- I don't really care. A lot of Windows users also have zero interest in Windows 8.x. It's adoption rate has been slower than even Windows Vista.

[Alexander Turcic]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But the problem is that the processor isn't up to running Qt5 and thus, it cannot run the latest Sigil and the latest Calibre. So regardless of how well it runs Linux, the computer isn't up to the job of running what's needed to be run. That's the problem.

I didn't know Qt5 was such a resource hog? (makes it almost sound like .NET )

For me, switching to Linux was a gradual process. With over ten years of Linux server experience, I was always itching to integrate Linux in my everyday processes. Initially that didn't work too well, when proprietary drivers were missing (hence very bad performances in graphics, wifi), and my favorite browser (IE - don't shoot me, that was before Phoenix/Firefox was born!) was missing. The KDE-based browsers just didn't work for me. But today things are so much more blurred. You have all the cool Internet apps on Linux - in fact some of them are solely available on Linux. I use Chrome for browsing, and whether you use Windows or Linux, it makes a zero difference. I use Sublime Text for code writing - and again, zero difference between Windows or Linux, except that the dependencies (Python, etc.) and tools are much better integrated in Linux.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Because a lot of newer software won't work on older hardware like processors without SSE2.

I don't think SSE2 support will be a problem for Gregg. It has been supported on all Pentium 4s (according to Wikipedia) and they began this support in 2001. The Dell 170L was released in 2003 or 2004.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Alexander Turcic

I didn't know Qt5 was such a resource hog? (makes it almost sound like .NET )

It's not a resource hog; it simply requires specific hardware capabilities in the CPU which older CPUs don't support.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

I would get a newer computer, probably a refurbished Dell with Windows 7 on it but what kind of specs (hard drive, RAM, processor speed, etc.) am I going to need to comfortably run QT5 and the newer versions of software (at least for the foreseeable future)?

I don't know for certain, but I'm pretty sure that Qt5 is standard on Xubuntu 14.04. I know, with certainty, that Calibre 2.14 (released yesterday) will work on your computer. I don't know anything about Sigil, but if it's main requirement is Qt5 you should be fine with Xubuntu 14.04, even using the computer you currently own.