Install openSUSE and remove Windows 7

English Install/Boot/Login
21

Thanks for that! It worked.

OK, I’m now at the “Suggested Partitioning” screen.

As mentioned before, I would like the install to remove all of Win 7. The hard drive is small.

There are 4 options:

Create LVM Based Proposal
Propose Separate Home parttion
Use Btrfs as Default File System
Enlarge Swap for Suspend

Also 3 buttons:

Create Partition Setup…
Import Partition Setup
Edit Partition Setup

I’m unsure how to proceed.

(PS. Is there any way to add an image from one’s computer into a post in this forum?)

22

I would say “Create Partition setup” is the most promising. Try it, you can allways go back when it doesn’t have a “Use the whole disk”. And you can allways bail out without destrying anything (well, you are not interested in anything that is on the disk now, thus you should have no fear whatsoever).

23

Hey! That worked. There was an option “Use Entire hard Disk”.

Thanks for your help!

24

On 2014-03-10 16:36, hcvv wrote:
>
> Epictetus;2629733 Wrote:
>> Then right-clicked it and selected “Send to Drive H:”
>> Drive H is the removable thumb drive (flash drive).
>>
> That sounds to me as if you did that in Windows. Sorry, but I have no
> idea what that does underneath.

I do. He simply did a standard file copy (same as in Dolphin or
Nautilus), and that, obviously, will never work, neither in Linux nor in
Windows.

He has to follow the instructions published on our web page to create
the install USB stick from Windows, with a special Windows program (I do
not say the name because I don’t remember and I don’t have that page
opened ATM).

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)

25

I would say so, in my experiences, and I have had plenty of that with both Operating Systems.

Although,

is a valid point.

No, in that commercial vendors (such as printer manufacturers, graphics card manufacturers, other hardware manufacture’s, commercial software producers) are far less likely to support Linux. Getting Linux versions of drivers and software from them is a problem.

Yes, in the way you are referring. You can always get the next versions of Linux free, no more re-purchasing a newer version of the software to replace a deliberately outdated operating system that you already purchased.

  1. No bloatware

Unfortunately, though there is a lot less with Linux, bloatware is the nature of the exponential growth in processing speeds, storage space, available memory, and massive amounts of code necessary for complex, powerfull programs. Oh, and is also the product of lazy programming.

Linux is not immune.

  1. Less prone to viruses

Yep.

26

Congratulations.

You are welcome.

27

openSUSE is up and running now.
Many thanks for the help and opinions!

28

On 2014-03-11 04:16, Fraser Bell wrote:
>
> Epictetus;2629766 Wrote:
>> I thought Linux was:
>>
>> 1. Faster
>>
>
> I would say so, in my experiences, and I have had plenty of that with
> both Operating Systems.

It depends on the application.

At the start of 2000, staroffice was way much slower than MS Office on
the same machine, which had little memory. On a powerful machine with
ample memory, the difference was not so huge.

About that time, Mozillla was terrible, it took minutes to start on my
machine. Netscape 4 was fast, and internet explorer was faster (Linux,
Linux, Windows).

Javascript was terrible. I had to wait minutes for some pages to complete.

I had to buy a machine with more memory because of that.

Linux was faster, if it had enough memory. I’m unsure why this was so.

>> 2. Better supported (eg. Windows xp will no longer be supported this
>> year)
>>
>
> No, in that commercial vendors (such as printer manufacturers, graphics
> card manufacturers, other hardware manufacture’s, commercial software
> producers) are far less likely to support Linux. Getting Linux versions
> of drivers and software from them is a problem.
>
> Yes, in the way you are referring. You can always get the next versions
> of Linux free, no more re-purchasing a newer version of the software to
> replace a deliberately outdated operating system that you already
> purchased.

But some times old hardware has problems in Linux.

For instance, if you have a 32 bit machine with 13.1, after restore from
hibernation things break. It was a kernel bug, and the patch in openSUSE
appeared about a month ago. Two months after release, is that?

>> 3. No bloatware
>>
>
> Unfortunately, though there is a lot less with Linux, bloatware is the
> nature of the exponential growth in processing speeds, storage space,
> available memory, and massive amounts of code necessary for complex,
> powerfull programs.

Yes, but in Linux you have a choice of several desktops. Instead of
using KDE or Gnome, you can use XFCE, LXDE, or even simpler choices.

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)

29

True, but even with a light desktop, an application you might want to use could still easily be bloatware, even if the O/S doesn’t appear to be.

30

On 2014-03-12 06:06, Fraser Bell wrote:
> True, but even with a light desktop, an application you might want to
> use could still easily be bloatware, even if the O/S doesn’t appear to
> be.

Absolutely. This is what happened with the switch from Netscape to
Mozilla: small machines that ran the former perfectly were unable to
even “walk” the later.

Or “staroffice” that took a full minute or two to start, while the same
machine booted MS office in 10 seconds.

Although the cause in those examples was not perhaps bloatware. It was
bad coding, IMHO.

Not everything in the opensource camp is shiny.

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)

31

Wasn’t StarOffice codded in Java?? And does not Word preload a bunch of itself??

32

Which isn’t clear to me:

in post #1 of this thread

In post #19 of this thread

Now windows XP expires.
That seems to be clear to almost everybody now.

But - how did things change in this thread ?

From the title of this thread and from post #1, I thought that a windows 7 would be the subject!

Windows XP instead?

What a surprise.

That’s a very different aspect!

33

What I mean:

if we’re talking about windows XP, I myself would have enjoied to help the OP to get rid of that,
besides a few hints about how he may save personal data - like eMail, photographs and more !

On the other hand, the openSUSE installer takes care to not delete an existing windows installation.
And that’s for good reasons.

At the end of the day, I think that the OP should be honest and should really tell what kind of system he/she has.

That’s all.

34

I have a complete different idea about what the OP wanted (and what he has now since post #27 above): A system ith openSUSE 13. only. Regardess of what was aready on it (Windows or not, Windows 7 or Windows XP or not). Thus he installed openSUSE teling the parrtitioner in it to use is entire disk. And as a consequence, the installation has overwriten all that was on that disk. And he is a happy openSUSE user now. No problems with multi-booting, mounting/using of non-Linux file systems still lying around on his disk. In short, not having half of the problems reported here on the forums. And of course not having any of the problems of any Windows user.

35

I am the original poster.
I’m sorry for any confusion I may have caused.

This all started when I found out Microsoft was no longer going to support xp. This would mean no more updates to Microsoft Security Essentials.
I then read it was possible to install xp INSIDE Linux, which presumably would protect it from viruses, etc.
So I purchased a used PC that had on it Windows 7.
Hence the original post - how to install openSUSE, at the same time getting rid of Win 7.

Thanks to replies in this read I am now running openSUSE.
(I’m in the process of downloading VirtualBox. No doubt I’ll have some questions about this but I’ll post in a separate thread.)
Thanks!

36

All of which is good to hear. Congratulations.

And your post and the followups are nothing to be sorry for, because it all prompted a good and interesting discussion. Thanks.

37

That’s what I thought!

38

On 2014-03-12 18:26, gogalthorp wrote:
>
> Wasn’t StarOffice codded in Java?? And does not Word preload a bunch of
> itself??

Java? Not that I remember, no. Java was used, same as in OpenOffice and
LibreOffice, for the wizards and such. You could run it without java
present, same as its descendants.

The problem with StarOffice was that it was a single code block
containing the entire suite (text, calc, base, and… anything more? I
don’t remember. Everything had to be read from disk, and loaded, on
machines that for most people at the time were scarce on memory. As soon
as you actually used, say, the editor, the kernel started to swap out
the sections that were not in use, like the calc part, and it worked
reasonably fast.

I’m not sure how much the coding was modularized and improved (with
OOo), or how much our machines grew much more capable, or both.

At that time my desktop machine had 5 megabytes. Or was it 32? I don’t
remember now… I had to buy a new one with 256MiB, and then things ran
decently.

There were other applications that emulated MS Word, like “abiword”,
which worked much better with limited memory. And there was another calc
sheet, what was the name… gnumeric? Same thing. Staroffice was the
best (IMO) but it was very bloated.

As to the second thing you comment, it is true, MS Office can preload a
lot of its components (it is optional, though; and I’m unsure of the
default setting). It could be argued, too, that some of its modules were
also part of the operating system, they are used on both.

You can (if it still works, I’m unsure) preload OOo/LO in Linux, too.

Well, it makes for faster booting of the application, but the system
takes much longer to start. In my case, when I say that StarOffice took
very long to start as compared to Office, I did not use preload on
either system.

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)

39

On 2014-03-12 23:16, Epictetus wrote:

> I then read it was possible to install xp INSIDE Linux, which presumably
> would protect it from viruses, etc.

Careful. If you use that virtualized XP to access Internet, it is in
danger of getting as much malware as if there were no Linux on the host.
The protection in that case is very limited.

You may continue to use that XP as long as you don’t use it to access
Internet. For that you should use instead the host system, ie, Linux.

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)

40

Makes sense. Thanks for that clarification, Robin.