Well Ubuntu crashed for me in virtual machines as well. Even when it's just sitting there being idle. As for Windows you CAN install it from an older iso but in your case I'd suggest getting a new iso from another PC with a faster internet. It's okay there's no repertoires with Windows so you can just save it to a USB drive. I'm only suggesting it because you seem to be struggling with... simple tasks.

Because Windows 3.11 is functional.

LOL! That's rich, coming from a guy who can't figure how to use Ubuntu!

I've written my own bask scripts. I nkow how to use Ubuntu it keeps crashing because... spoiler... it's... a... piece... of... shit. Even the Linux community agrees dude.

Could be your virtualization. I tried running Linux in a vm from Windows years ago and my success was very mitigated.

However, native virtualization in Linux is pretty advanced. I've run both Ubuntu and Debian in kvm on top of a Ubuntu host and it was fine.

I wouldn't call it shite.

Let's be honest, I've noticed the occasional rough edge here and there, but nothing I couldn't work around (yes, occasionally, you have to Google the error you are getting, usually related to some less compatible hardware or BIOS setting, and yes, you'll be stuck in a hard place if you don't want to use the command line to apply some fixes, but happily, because the Ubuntu community is quite large, there are very few errors under the sun that have not been encountered and documented).

Wouldn't have been using it since 2009 if it was shite. Infinitely better than Windows for most software development work.

Bask?

Do you mean bash? And I don't use Ubuntu, I use Fedora, backed by an actual company.

Fedora is technically Red Hat's experimental playground.

If you are looking for stability in the Red Hat family and don't want to fork out money, go with Centos. It's the Debian of Red Hat: Free and stable.

Very popular as an internal development OS for companies that want to be compatible with RHEL.

Yeah I meant bash but I don't like Fedora. The way they setup the desktop is weird and the way it installs software is even weirder. Can we please just have exe's or something like that.

What's weird about the way it installs software? You can do some very fancy stuff with rpm installers... It can look a bit arcane from the development end, but the result for the end-user is nothing short of fantastic.

I personally prefer to package Docker images, but I can see why some devs are fans.

It happens on hardware and only with Ubuntu. It's Ubuntu.


It's also pretty redundant. I mean what is the point. I like emulators myself since they add to your current libery of games. But what is the point of building a computer to run nothing but PS2 games? You might as well just get a PS2. Same for how people install Linux and go through all this trouble to get Windows stuff to work.

Well, for starters, you can run Windows on kvm with GPU passthrough on play games without having to reboot your Linux OS with dual-boot. With both CPU and GPU passthrough, you'll get pretty much native-like performance.

You can also emulate a different hardware architecture (ex: arm64) to test some stuff in it. It's slow as hell (wouldn't recommend running a full desktop in an emulated hardware architecture), but when you just want to run something in the background and get a result, it does the work (funnily enough recently, I tried running something for the Raspberry Pi in a vm and got an error and at first, I dismissed it as some inaccuracy with the emulated hardware, but then I encountered the same error later in an actual Raspberry Pi ;P).

Also, if I want to do some less safe stuff that might screw up my machine (or you know, go on some websites that I shouldn't), I prefer to do it in a vm (if it screws up my vm, I can scrap it).

And last, but not least, when you have a machine with 64GB RAM like me, you can actually run a small cluster of vms directly on your machine to so some quick experiments with some multi-machine prod-like scenarios.

Bash scripts? All by yourself? I stand corrected, and bow to your expertise!

Sarcasm not withstanding, What will take you hours to accomplish will take me only moments. Experts work smarter, not harder :P

Executables do exist. Discord is packaged as such from a tar.gz.

Thing is, aside from the good ole .sh, there's no standard between them. Each different potential container has upsides and downsides. There's Flatpak, snaps, appimage, straight up binaries, and probably other obscure formats that claim to solve the issue of package dependancy.

Yeah but not the impotent stuff like drivers and programs like VLC