FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Ubuntu ?





jainakshay040
Hello linux users and new bies!


Ubuntu is the best operating system in this soft-world i think so


The ten bst thing s


1 No virus! yes no need to fear and also to run hours of virus scans!
2 easier than windows/Mac in UI-user interface
3 Easiest setup and fast too!
4 No need of Drivers for basic hardwares included
5 Full functionality to office work, as included open office org Which is the best open source productivity suite!
6 Included many useful packages like - Gimp image editor -an altenative of adobe photo sho and this one is Free!,.and many many
7 .Easy Remote access ! Connect Your ubuntu machine from anyone with the inbuilt remote desktop feature!
8.Super graphics and sound uality with ALSA and other linux video enhance ments
9 Fastest os! Turns a Old machine in P4!
10 Finaly Reduces Cost of a PC and Gives you complete peace of mind being free!
HamsterMan
One could probably make a list of contradictory arguments, but Ubuntu is still an awesome operating system.
LostOverThere
I'm sorry to say, but all of those points either are opinions or apply to Linux in general. Confused
cavedog2
Yes. It kinda does. So for new linux users I would recommend Ultimat Edition. It's based on ubuntu but its already customized for you! Like skinz added and wine installed. Its super. i would recommend that linux to any 1 wanting to try out linux! Here is the link! http://www.ultimateedition.info
kansloos
A small misunderstanding, a full feature-rich Gnome system is generally a little slower as Windows XP.
LostOverThere
Ultimate Edition...you can't be serious. Neutral
kitsrock
i must agree with the feature rich gnome being slightly slow.

but i think it has improved over the years, and maybe it'll be better.

i thought about changing to kde, or maybe even go further and change it into icewm or xfce, but then i got really lazy and opted to go for upgrade in hardware.
swizzy
Quote:
1 No virus! yes no need to fear and also to run hours of virus scans!

Mac is equally safe, so are other unix distros

Quote:
2 easier than windows/Mac in UI-user interface

Win XP/Mac seem to be much more easier for many users...

Quote:
3 Easiest setup and fast too!

The install CD takes upto 10 mins, and the DVD used to take around 30 mins. Mac 10.5.2 takes 20 mins to install on a MacBook (with all bundled software), and XP takes >40mins.

Quote:
4 No need of Drivers for basic hardwares included

Almost all printers, graphics devices, and even minor hardware had mac drivers bundled with them, very few of them had linux support

Quote:
5 Full functionality to office work, as included open office org Which is the best open source productivity suite!

I disagree, Office 2008 is the most polished and most useful yet.

Quote:
6 Included many useful packages like - Gimp image editor -an altenative of adobe photo sho and this one is Free!,.and many many

Gimp, Seashore, Photoshop, are all supported natively on Mac

Quote:
7 .Easy Remote access ! Connect Your ubuntu machine from anyone with the inbuilt remote desktop feature!

Mac/XP seem to have the best sharing features available

Quote:
8.Super graphics and sound uality with ALSA and other linux video enhance ments

Mac had better sound Shocked

9 Fastest os! Turns a Old machine in P4!
10 Finaly Reduces Cost of a PC and Gives you complete peace of mind being free!

9,10 are the only i agree with you Razz
mehulved
kansloos wrote:
A small misunderstanding, a full feature-rich Gnome system is generally a little slower as Windows XP.

Well you're comparing an OS released in 2002 to one released in 2008, there's bound to be differences. Even if you consider XP SP2, GNOME is slightly heavier but still there's a difference of good 4 years between their releases. I haven't tried XP SP3 so can't say anything about it.
But, when you compare it with Vista SP1 you will definitely see ubuntu having an edge, maybe a slight one(I don't have benchmarks as I don't use either).
Though your statement is true, it's a bit misleading if not explained properly.
kansloos
kitsrock wrote:
i thought about changing to kde, or maybe even go further and change it into icewm or xfce, but then i got really lazy and opted to go for upgrade in hardware.


KDE is even slower, XFCE and IceWM are faster but don't offer as much features and even then Xorg itself is a little slow
kitsrock
kde is slower? damn. i thought it was just gnome that was slow.

yeah, it's true xfce and icewm has less features, but i don't mind going minimalistic.
Fire Boar
I prefer KDE myself, and with a bit of tweaking it's the most useable desktop environment out there.

Remember: Ubuntu is not an operating system, it is a distribution of the Linux operating system. Linux 2.6.24 in fact. So, let's see about each point, taking Ubuntu Gnome, Kubuntu KDE and Linux in general.

1. No viruses. This is a common point about Linux. Quite simply, Linux is designed to be as secure as you make it. There are no back doors, no security holes beyond what you make. Of course, running everything as root is going to make you die horribly. Ubuntu/Kubuntu is good here in that it enforces the use of sudo/gksudo/kdesudo to perform administrative tasks, and automatically sets a random root password which it doesn't tell you (although you can still do sudo passwd to set the root password to whatever you want).

Really, it's only Windows that suffers from viruses because of poor design choices early on in the security department.

2. This really depends on the desktop environment and distribution, and here I agree. For Ubuntu/Gnome, the interface is well laid out and things do what you expect them to do. For Kubuntu, it's not quite so clear but in Hardy Heron the System Settings panel is in the right place, and it doesn't take long to figure out how to customize it. Once customized, your system will be even better than Gnome, simply because YOU decide everything. For Linux in general, I tend to disagree, however, performing complex tasks is made very easy through use of Bash, which is MUCH easier to use than DOS.

3. Setup is really very easy for this distribution. You can also customize every aspect of mounting your filesystem, or just opt for guided partitioning. This stuff is pretty standard for Linux distributions, and makes dual-booting with Windows or another operating system easy. Setup is also very fast. The bad thing is that Ubuntu takes over the MBR all the time, so the last installed 'buntu system will be in control of Grub. This is often desirable, but not always in more complex systems.

4. Apart from proprietory drivers like nvidia-glx, pretty much everything you'll need is set up from the go. Most distros use kernel module probing, (K)Ubuntu included, which makes boot times slower but eliminates the need to install drivers in most cases. Sometimes you'll need to use ndiswrapper for wireless drivers because they're all just so varied, which can be a bit of a faff, but apart from that it's fine. With Ubuntu especially, things tend to "just work".

That said, compiling your own kernel with only the modules for hardware you need built in can be a very good option. It makes the kernel size smaller and speeds up boot times a lot. The disadvantage? You have to configure it which is quite difficult to do, and if you change the hardware on your computer you'll need to compile another one.

5. Open Office vs. MS Office? Open Office any day, since it's cheaper and doesn't feature the new interface that MS Office 2008+ features. Microsoft failed hard with their latest Office offering.

6. GIMP isn't fantastic, but it's pretty good. The software is pretty universal across distributions, you can install any Linux software on any distribution. It's just what comes packaged in, and whether it is useful or bloat. Ubuntu is quite good at only including what you're likely to need, although I question Kubuntu's decision to make Konqueror the default web browser and Dolphin the default file manager - it ought to be Konqueror as the file manager and Firefox as the browser, with Dolphin left out entirely.

7. Remote access is definitely a class where Linux shines. Very very easy indeed. SSH is perfect for most remote tasks, giving access to a shell on that machine wherever you are. Combined with the Screen program it's possible to have two people looking at the same terminal, which is very nice. And there's remote desktop facilities too.

8. Linux can potentially look very nice. It depends on what your graphics card can do, what desktop environment you're using, etc. etc.

9. It's fast and can do many tasks very quickly. However, bootup times for Ubuntu are not very impressive, thanks to two things. Firstly the kernel module feature, and secondly the fact that all boot files are spread out across the hard disk instead of blocked at the beginning like on Windows. NTFS and FAT, although they fragment very easily, are faster when dealing with multiple files because the mechanical parts on the disk don't have to move very far to reach the next file. ext2 and ext3 spread the files out across the disk, which is great for avoiding fragmentation but awful for booting up a machine. However, boot times still rival and in many cases overtake Windows.

10. Perfectly true. Everything's open source, you're not relying on a corporation's word, and you don't have to worry about TC (Trusted Computing, or as most FOSS supporters put it, Treacherous Computing).
LostOverThere
kitsrock wrote:
kde is slower? damn. i thought it was just gnome that was slow.

yeah, it's true xfce and icewm has less features, but i don't mind going minimalistic.


Yeah, I thought GNOME was slower then KDE too.

Both This and This are old but might provide a little insight into the issue.
frih
you cant say so because there are lots more OS available. i think you should also check them.


But ubuntu is a very good OS. it comes free of cost. they provide free shipping. they are really doing good work...
hofodomo01
This is one of the nicer distros I've used. The only real gripe about it is that it contains so much bloat and extra crap along with everything else. Still a nice linux distribution nonetheless, but makes me feel like I'm using windows vista all over again...
sondosia
I also really like Ubuntu and have been using it for months without switching back, but I think I'll still try some other distros sometime. All linux distros have something great about them, after all. It's LINUX. =)
albuferque
Well, Ubuntu would NOT be my first option, take a look at the Linux Sucks-Rules-O-Meter:

http://bentham.k2.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/media/linux-srom.html

Arnie
It appears Ubuntu lacks a spellchecker, or the average user is too stupid to properly use it.
o_man
jainakshay040 wrote:
Hello linux users and new bies!


Ubuntu is the best operating system in this soft-world i think so


The ten bst thing s


1 No virus! yes no need to fear and also to run hours of virus scans!
2 easier than windows/Mac in UI-user interface
3 Easiest setup and fast too!
4 No need of Drivers for basic hardwares included
5 Full functionality to office work, as included open office org Which is the best open source productivity suite!
6 Included many useful packages like - Gimp image editor -an altenative of adobe photo sho and this one is Free!,.and many many
7 .Easy Remote access ! Connect Your ubuntu machine from anyone with the inbuilt remote desktop feature!
8.Super graphics and sound uality with ALSA and other linux video enhance ments
9 Fastest os! Turns a Old machine in P4!
10 Finaly Reduces Cost of a PC and Gives you complete peace of mind being free!



1. Not true. If you stupidly install wine as root then the windows programs installed in wine open you up to virus attacks. It's not likely, but I once uninstalled gnome while trying to remove beryl. n00bs will be n00bs.
2. depends on the GUI. gnome is easy for the mac side of the pond, but coming from windows I found it confusing. KDE works more like Explorer, but it's buggy. there are several other GUIs and all of them have flaws. When someone creates a GUI with the same level of finish and ease-of-use that Finder and Explorer then maybe, until then it's subjective.
3. the setup is easy and fast (depending on the distro) but actually using it has a learning curve.
4. yeah, for basic hardware. it's recommended that you use hardware that's at least 2 1/2 years old to ensure compatibility.
5. Which edition? all prior to 3.0 suck
6. again, depends on the distro. and i didn't think gimp was in the standard ubuntu iso.
7. also depends on whether it's KDE or gnome
8. the sound and video quality is mostly dependent on your hardware, kiddo.
9. ubuntu is actually one of the slower linux releases because it has a GUI
10. buying a PC w/o an OS is actually more expensive from most retailers
Kaseas
Windows and mac are both more polished systems in general. The decentralization really hurts Linux. While I find Linux fun to toy with, I prefer windows.
Nolt
Ubuntu or Debian those two linux are the best. Ubuntu is for ppl who dont want software from Redmond (MS), they want learn somthing about PC, dont want bother about viruses etc. Btw viruses and wine, wine is great tool, but also you can use VirtualBox for WinXP and soft for it. No troubles with viruses, and even if... its only virtual machine you can delete one file and all your problems are gone Smile

Btw GNOME... you cant mach GNOME to WinXP explorer... explorer its not good lookin as GNOME, its normal that GNOME can take a little bit more memory.
puuhikki
I like Ubuntu very much. It is nice when things just work. But unfortunately I have to use Windows XP sometimes. It sucks!
Tuvitor
I like my Ubuntu 8.10 Server install on the other machine. With Fluxbox set up as my desktop manager, it's simple and does the job I need. I'm a long-time Linux user (have even run LFS & Gentoo back in the day) but I really dig Ubuntu's simplicity. I like it when stuff "just works". I learned a lot back in the day with the "geekier" distros... I guess I went backward. Laughing
babygeek
I have the latest ubuntu jaunty 9.04 and am very pleased with it. I am the kind of person who occasionally clutter up my harddisk with lots of program, which drags it down. 2 things which impressed me about ubuntu; very lean (you can either make it barebone OS) or you can have a fully-loaded OS, depending on your preference & machine power. 2. very beginner-friendly.

used to have gentoo too. not bad also. but then, ubuntu came along and I never looked back. as for stability wise, those who have migrated from windows like me (especially who have had so much problems with long file name issues in windows), linux is the natural way to go. so yup, ubuntu gets my vote, totally!
killianvillian
I've been on Ubuntu for about 3 months now, using VBox to operate windows programs that don't run on Ubuntu.

WINE doesnt fix this problem!

Anyway, my understanding of the OS mixing is limited, but I think the limited nature of Ubuntu's 3D capabilities are why the Windows running under it doesnt work.

Im using AutoCAD. When i tried 3ds Max, it doesnt show anything.

Any advice would be welcome.
ocalhoun
killianvillian wrote:


Im using AutoCAD. When i tried 3ds Max, it doesnt show anything.

Any advice would be welcome.

If you run it in a virtual machine in VMware, which installs nicely on linux, it should work, though it may be slow.
Hogwarts
Kaseas wrote:
Windows and mac are both more polished systems in general. The decentralization really hurts Linux. While I find Linux fun to toy with, I prefer windows.


Are you kidding? With any decent car you buy, you put the work into polishing and treating it yourself. My current setup feels vastly more polished than any of those bloat-OS's you mention, is faster and is as customized as I want. I can just go /home/tobias/Work and I'm instantly on an SSH mounted folder for work; no need to bother with Putty and WinSCP. The decentralization is one of Linux's key strong points. Competing distributions need to compete with each other; enhancing the overall amount of production that goes into Linux. Sure, some of this is wasted, but if an inferior distribution is published people will move away to other distributions. Unlike with Windows. Windows Vista came along and screwed them over completely. Sure, you can argue that Windows 7 shows promise, but such a mistake wouldn't have happened in the Linux community. Possibly, even, such a failure may happen in the Mac community, possibly when everybody works out they've been using glorified fisher-price hardware all along.
evilgeniuself
Although I use Ubuntu (I'm very supportive of the new Jaunty base they're using for 9.04), I would not agree that it is the "best" system in those categories. Of course, that's mostly opinion based. Most of those come with most Linux distributions, as LostOverThere said. I would agree though that Ubuntu has much faster installation than Mac or Windows (depending on the machine), and that as a Linux operating system it is fairly easy to use. (My personal favorite operating system is Devil Linux, by the way, even though it's not nearly the most efficient.)
froginabox
Hogwarts wrote:
Possibly, even, such a failure may happen in the Mac community, possibly when everybody works out they've been using glorified fisher-price hardware all along.


I'm going to agree here (typing this from my Apple laptop) - I've always been just a bit afraid of compatibility problems with their OS upgrades. So far, so good. I do disagree about Fisher-Price hardware, any machine (my G5) that can keep up with a full-bore ProTools|HD 3 Accel session's voracious appetite for CPU and RAM is not too shabby in my book.
hummer010
swizzy wrote:
Quote:
5 Full functionality to office work, as included open office org Which is the best open source productivity suite!

I disagree, Office 2008 is the most polished and most useful yet.


The statement was openoffice is the best open source productivity suite. Office 2008 is about as far from open source as you can get.

It's hard to disagree that Openoffice is the best open source suite.
ocalhoun
froginabox wrote:
I do disagree about Fisher-Price hardware, any machine (my G5) that can keep up with a full-bore ProTools|HD 3 Accel session's voracious appetite for CPU and RAM is not too shabby in my book.

I think he was talking about the external appearance of the hardware... Which does bear a striking resemblance to children's toys, given their rounded corners and tendency towards bright colors.
froginabox
The first few generations of iMac? I will give you that for sure! Anything produced in the last five years? Not really. My G5 looks like this:


Bit too much aluminum to look like a toy Wink
babygeek
re: openoffice

open office is good. been using it for some time. however, it does not exit gracefully, if system memory is overloaded. it just 'disappeared'. annoying!
Agent ME
How does it not exit gracefully? I'd think it's good if the program just disappears when it exits. What annoys me a lot is programs that decide they have to do some sort of animation or wait a few seconds when you try to close them.
killianvillian
as usual, ocalhoun, youre like an all seeing eye, seeing every post i leave.

anyway, in line with my admiration for your typical informed and eye opening responses, i will try vmware.

it will take at least the weekend.
Phinx
I am using Ubuntu for about 5 moths now and i also dual-boot with WinXP. Frankly, Ubuntu is not the best Linux out there. Why? Well it is feature rich, no doubt about it, but that is also it's downfalls. Stuff that comes pre-packed with the OS is a lot of times unneeded so you end up uninstalling a few bits and pieces. It's tailored for general use and to please all, so no super speed here, but it is still faster than Windows. On the other hand good driver support, vast amount of software makes it attractive. Ubuntu's biggest plus is that it is easy to use. I mean there are other systems like Suse or even Mandriva that are graspable to the common people, but frankly this one is surely at least in the TOP3 by the ease of use. That's why it is so popular as entry-Linux. Before i used both OpenSuSe and Mandriva and i might try out Mandriva again in the near future.

I am guilty of using XP though as i am a casual gamer. Hands down on this one.
Fire Boar
Phinx wrote:
I am guilty of using XP though as i am a casual gamer. Hands down on this one.


Hah, no worries man. Until developers start making games for Linux, PC gamers will just have to manage with an inferior OS when gaming. Such is life.
Agent ME
Most of the games I like have worked on Linux. For Quake 3 (also quake 4, and other iD games) and Unreal Tournament 2004, you can download the linux binary online and use the disk to install the game content. Many games also work in Wine, though some have minor problems that need a bit of tweaking to get working correctly. Wine's website has a whole section on fully supported programs, and tips on getting other programs to work.
killianvillian
So far WINE has been very buggy. The tweaking part has been too much of a headache.

I tried AutoCAD for instance, and the text on the install screen was in English, but in Greek characters. due to inexperience, I am going to bypass the time it takes to track down each problem from trying to get WINE to for that program.

The virtual machine has worked ok, but i notice a lag time that wasnt there, when I used the same computer for Windows.

I ran Windows under both VMware and Virtual Box.

And for some reason lately, I cant agree that Ubuntu is faster. I have noticed that even in firefox there is a lag time when scrolling down. I think I need to get into one of the so-called less beginner-friendly distributions if I want smooth scrolling and virtualization to work better for me.
Hogwarts
froginabox, Apple teaches people how to be stupid. By having everything "Just work" you're also making things easier for phishers, trojans, etc. that target Mac users. Why? Because people who use Macs generally don't do anything, they live in a fisher price environment and not the real world. As Macs become more mainstream, their users will be targeted more then Windows users, because of this faux confidence in the security. At least Windows users will admit that they don't understand everything, but Mac users will decide that they're invulnerable to every possible threat on the internet.
Fire Boar
Hogwarts wrote:
froginabox, Apple teaches people how to be stupid. By having everything "Just work" you're also making things easier for phishers, trojans, etc. that target Mac users. Why? Because people who use Macs generally don't do anything, they live in a fisher price environment and not the real world. As Macs become more mainstream, their users will be targeted more then Windows users, because of this faux confidence in the security. At least Windows users will admit that they don't understand everything, but Mac users will decide that they're invulnerable to every possible threat on the internet.


The trouble is, this is largely true. Macs don't get viruses. Linux doesn't get viruses either. They both use the UNIX base which is an extremely hostile environment for a virus to try and survive in. Windows, on the other hand, uses the known-to-be-vulnerable Windows base, and gets by by recommending that their users buy and install expensive anti-virus software. Which the user then assumes does everything for them. Expensive and a hassle to set up.
Arnie
Good point there, Mac users are really invulnerable to phishers because phising is totally OS-related. Only Windows users receive emails that say their bank's tech supports needs them to confirm their password.
Fire Boar
Arnie wrote:
Good point there, Mac users are really invulnerable to phishers because phising is totally OS-related. Only Windows users receive emails that say their bank's tech supports needs them to confirm their password.


Phishing? I hope you were joking, it's completely OS-independent. But phishing is not the same as a virus.
Hogwarts
Fire Boar wrote:
Arnie wrote:
Good point there, Mac users are really invulnerable to phishers because phising is totally OS-related. Only Windows users receive emails that say their bank's tech supports needs them to confirm their password.


Phishing? I hope you were joking, it's completely OS-independent. But phishing is not the same as a virus.


He was being sarcastic. Windows, on the other hand, people acknowledge there are risks. Windows isn't highly vulnerable, as an up-to-date XP, Vista and Windows 7 are more than secure enough. The only reason there are large viruses is because there are noodles who turn off automatic updates.

And just because a Mac uses the Unix kernel does not make it invulnerable. With Linux, generally only more computer-literate people use it. Windows users are across the board. Macintoshes, however, are seen as a panacea, and thus they're beginning to attract the Premade-PoS crowd (they're not particularly bright).
gtoroap
Well, I starting to use Ubuntu and until now, I had have a great experience. In fact, I'm considering convert me totally to GNU/Linux. Maybe in a couple of years, I develop something usefull in this environment. By now, I only will test and enjoy this great OS. See ya
Fire Boar
Hogwarts wrote:
And just because a Mac uses the Unix kernel does not make it invulnerable. With Linux, generally only more computer-literate people use it. Windows users are across the board. Macintoshes, however, are seen as a panacea, and thus they're beginning to attract the Premade-PoS crowd (they're not particularly bright).


Ah, good call. But that's the fault of the users, not the OS. It's rather sad how people are so wont to fall for these cons. "Renew your account details! Just log in here!" Ugh. I hope Safari has some sort of anti-phishing filter.
Arnie
Fire Boar wrote:
Phishing? I hope you were joking, it's completely OS-independent. But phishing is not the same as a virus.
Is it still sarcasm when I have to explain it?

PROTIP: I wasn't the first one to mention phishing in this topic, so your reply to me basically shows the flaw in your own previous post.
Fire Boar
Arnie
A bunny is fine too.
welshsteve
I think Ubuntu is a great operating system. I've used it off and on in VirtualBox for a while, but now I've installed it on my laptop as the only operating system. Windows run quite slowly on this laptop, but Ubuntu runs like a dream. It's still early days in my Ubuntu experiences, but I'm very impressed so far. The next thing I plan to do is to get things such as Wine, and Apache/MySQL working as well so I can use my laptop as a development machine.

I've also tried Mandriva, DreamLinux and Linux Mint, and all of these are good as well. DreamLinux is much like the Mac OSX with the application shortcut dock at the bottom of the screen.
ProfessorY91
puuhikki wrote:
I like Ubuntu very much. It is nice when things just work. But unfortunately I have to use Windows XP sometimes. It sucks!


I would think that driver configuration, etc is much more of a pain in the butt on Ubuntu than it is on Windows XP. It took me an hour to manually install an NVIDIA 9800 GTX graphics card manually because I didn't fully understand how to configure my Xorg to save the changes.

On XP, its pop in the CD and go.

On Vista, its pop in the CD, open task manager, kill off a bunch of random non critical processes, and install. And then wait a couple of hours for your computer to restart.

On Windows XP Pirated Edition, its pop in the CD and go even faster.

On Mac OS X, its pop in the CD and go... to no games?!
Fire Boar
ProfessorY91 wrote:
I would think that driver configuration, etc is much more of a pain in the butt on Ubuntu than it is on Windows XP. It took me an hour to manually install an NVIDIA 9800 GTX graphics card manually because I didn't fully understand how to configure my Xorg to save the changes.


Jockey much? It's as easy as opening Jockey, clicking the latest driver version and clicking "activate". Downloads and activates straight away. Only if you install manually do you have to configure, and even then all you need to do is type the command "sudo nvidia-xconfig" into the terminal and it'll do it all for you. I think it's less a case of "this is a pain" and more a case of "I don't have a clue what I'm doing". Anyway, graphics cards and sometimes wireless devices are the only things you ever seem to need drivers for - the rest is normally build into the kernel. On Windows you have to install something for everything for good hardware support.
Related topics
Help : Fedora Core 4 + Ubuntu
Anybody using ubuntu in here?
new Ubuntu (linux) version is out!
Best flavor of Linux?
HOW TO install/uninstall .deb files on Ubuntu!
Free ubuntu cd-rom
Which linux is the best for a new user?
SUSE and Ubuntu
Ubuntu Linux blank screen on startup
Ubuntu doesn't recognize modem? (U.S. Robotics 56k?)
UBUNTU HELP!!
Why you should not be using Ubuntu!
Ubuntu LIVE CD
Dialup in Ubuntu
I want to start using Linux.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Computers -> Operating Systems

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.