Trying to install Ubuntu

[kodi]

I am trying to install Ubuntu but cannot take control of the pointer with my mouse, i can only use the keyboard.
I have installed Vista and windows 7 without any problems.

 

[Night Hawk]

You likely saw an incomplete install there. That would be the thought on that right off since you should have the cursor working on first sight!

When installing ubuntu did you immediately run the install option or wait until ubuntu was running live before starting the installer? Sometimes that can have an effect if you go too fast there.

 

[pparks1]

What virtualization software are you using? I've used VMWare Server 2.0 and Sun VirtualBox 3.0.4 without any trouble on my Win7 64-bit box running Ubuntu 9.04.

 

[kodi]

I was trying to install it in Windows Virtual PC I managed to install vista without any problems as the cursor on the application was taken over by the normal cursor but with this one I have two cursors, one that belongs to windows (which i can control) and one in Ubuntu setup that I can't move.

 

[pparks1]

What version of Ubuntu are you using? I will give this a shot tomorrow when I am at work as I have a Win7 desktop there that I can more quickly try this out on for you.

 

[kodi]

Ubuntu desktop 9.04 i386.iso downloaded from the ubuntu site.
I can run it as a live disc so i think the File is not corrupt.
I was following Brinks Tutorial for Vista and Win7 so that probably will be the problem. Someone posted in the Tutorial that they installed ubuntu without a problem.

 

[Night Hawk]

The VPC isn't really cross platform there. That would explain the problems seen right away. The SUN and other VM wares are far more tolerate being 3rd party while the VPC is mainly Windows. Someone was simply fortunate to see an install work right off.

The most I've been able to see there was simply seeing the live cd load when going to startup the XP mode. With the live cd even a GParted disk left in the drive that would load instead. With Virtual Box on the other hand that seems to welcome any OS there. When that was seen I didn't have a vhd ready to try the install option.

 

[pparks1]

I would think that it "should work". Generally speaking, the Linux OS's don't get any support from Microsoft with regards to VM add-ons after they are installed like the MS OS's do...but I would think that the install would go smooth.

Oh well, if that doesn't work out for you, give Virtual Box a shot. I find the performance is about 2-3x better than Virtual PC anyway. And it supports Linux and Windows OS's as well with regards to add-on VM tools and such.

I'll try this out tomorrow morning for you though. I have all the stuff that I need at work.

 

[Night Hawk]

The reason I was suggesting VBox for a try would be from anything SUN already being somewhat UNIX based to start with while being cross platform.

 

[pparks1]

The reason I was suggesting VBox for a try would be from anything SUN already being somewhat UNIX based to start with while being cross platform.

Oh, I agree. I even suggested using VirtualBox. It's what I use at home and performance against Virtual PC is night and day.

 

[Night Hawk]

I haven't been running into any real problems with the VPC itself except any vhd attached in the Disk Management will drop on each shutdown or restart automatically requiring that to be reattached again and again later. The SUN Portable easily saw a multiboot setup without a hitch and makes a good place for custom installs when working cross platform.

The one thing I'll likely try here on any "next attempt" would be first creating a new vhd to see just how far the ubuntu 9.04 installer will go. First you have to run it live and choose the install option to select the vhd rather then the immediate install option seen when loading. 20 minutes or so later simply browse into users, your user name, AppData>local>Microsoft and so forth and create a new shortcut to the vmc file not the vhd itself to see it will run.

 

[kodi]

I have managed to fully install it and update it using the keyboard but can't make it use my mouse

 

[Night Hawk]

If you made it that far and everything is locked that suggests one of two things. One it was an incomplete install for some reason. Or Linux simply won't run due to a compatibility issue which is quite likely!

When trying to get Windows 3.1 to do more then install on a virtual dos drive that ran into the same thing despite the Windows folder found intact! Yet DOSBox the program used will mount a virtual C and run an old 8bit pc game?

You wouldn't believe one thing just found when now going to one inbox to check things. VM ware Fusion2 was seen in the ad! Talk about irony?!

 

[kodi]

It looks like i will have use the live cd method to run it when i want ubuntu

 

[Night Hawk]

Essentially Vista is almost the minimum requirement For the new VPC while VPC 2007 supported XP. Now you can see one reason for MS developing the XP mode itself to allow businesses to run older apps in more of a simulated XP environment.

For seeing how XP would go on and run the Pro edition would be a little suitable for this over the Home edition. For Linux the installer apparently worked like a charm for you since that simply unpacks and configures the setup files. Once you tried running ubuntu there is simply locked most likely for the MS gearing towards Windows to start with.

One thought would another small distro other then ubuntu. SUN's VBox or another vm ware would seem to be the solution for running another OS like Linux however. With 7 on the portable version of that there's still no way to mount and attach that type of vhd in the disk management however since it isn't recognised there.

 

[pparks1]

I have confirmed the same problem on my work machine. The mouse doesn't work during the install, however I can complete the install and boot the machine using the keyboard. Once installed, the mouse still doesn't work.

I have also confirmed that this same issue, is NOT an issue using Sun VirtualBox 3.0.6 (which released yesterday). Mouse works perfectly during the installer as well as once the VM is booted.

And I tried a booting time test between the 2 VM applications to judge performance
--Ubuntu 9.04 boots in 21 seconds on VirtualBox (with a working mouse )
--Ubuntu 9.04 boots in 29 seconds on VirtualPC

 

[Dark Nova Gamer]

It looks like i will have use the live cd method to run it when i want ubuntu

Just going to jump in here, but you could install it using WUBI. It basically installs Ubuntu as if it is an application (meaning it can be removed the same way other applications can).

After installing it, during start-up it will give you the option to boot into Ubuntu or Windows. (basically like a dual-boot)

It offers better performance then using the LiveCD feature.

 

[pparks1]

Yeah, the wubi installer for Ubuntu is pretty sweet. it's what I use on my work laptop....which by corporate standards has to run Vista. Essentially you put the Ubuntu cd into the box, you pick a folder to installed Ubuntu into (eg. C:\ubuntu) and pick a file size for the Ubuntu OS. I gave mine 30GB. It installs into a flat file in this directory and adds a boot loader entry to Windows...so when booting your machine you can pick between Ubuntu and Vista.

I did the same thing as well with Windows 7. I installed Windows 7 into a VHD file on my hard drive. It added itself to the boot loader and now I can pick between Windows 7 and Windows Vista.

It's a fantastic way to run multiple OS's without having to do any partitioning or risk that your computer won't boot up after a fubar'd install. So, the work machine has the standard Vista and layout that was given to me, and I have 2 more OS's just running on top of that. And without the virtualization so it's about 95% as fast as a real dual boot. There is a small trade-off in performance running from the VHD file or the Ubuntu flat file versus using an actual hard drive.

 

[Dark Nova Gamer]

Yeah, the wubi installer for Ubuntu is pretty sweet. it's what I use on my work laptop....which by corporate standards has to run Vista. Essentially you put the Ubuntu cd into the box, you pick a folder to installed Ubuntu into (eg. C:\ubuntu) and pick a file size for the Ubuntu OS. I gave mine 30GB. It installs into a flat file in this directory and adds a boot loader entry to Windows...so when booting your machine you can pick between Ubuntu and Vista.

I did the same thing as well with Windows 7. I installed Windows 7 into a VHD file on my hard drive. It added itself to the boot loader and now I can pick between Windows 7 and Windows Vista.

It's a fantastic way to run multiple OS's without having to do any partitioning or risk that your computer won't boot up after a fubar'd install. So, the work machine has the standard Vista and layout that was given to me, and I have 2 more OS's just running on top of that. And without the virtualization so it's about 95% as fast as a real dual boot. There is a small trade-off in performance running from the VHD file or the Ubuntu flat file versus using an actual hard drive.

Ubuntu 9.10 Final is suppose to have a better WUBI install method that will not have performance loss. Meaning it should be as good as using a partition. So I've read anyways.

If only other distro's had WUBI. Like Fedora.

 

[pparks1]

Ubuntu 9.10 Final is suppose to have a better WUBI install method that will not have performance loss. Meaning it should be as good as using a partition. So I've read anyways.

Yeah, I'm not sure how that would be possible. The performance gain lately is going from ext3 to ext4 on Ubuntu. But with the file riding an NTFS file system, you've got an extra layer their that otherwise would not be...which is going to result in a small amount of performance degradation.

If only other distro's had WUBI. Like Fedora.

I agree with you there. I'll take the slight performance hit for the drop-dead simpleness of it.