How Linux/Ubuntu saved Windows (twice !!)

How Linux/Ubuntu saved Windows (twice !!)

I have received lots of good information from Windows BBS so I wanted to tell a brief story that includes a problem-solving technique that I had not previously considered. Here’s what happened:

My wife called from work and asked why her Dell Windows XP laptop said
“NTLDR is missing Press Ctrl Alt Del to Restart” and refused to boot up.

It sounded bad to me, so she brought her laptop home and I began research on the web, discovering lots of reported problems and suggested solutions, including FIXBOOT, FIXMBR, the Windows Recovery Console, and other things. But the Windows Recovery Console refused to start without the “Administrative Password” and nobody had any idea what it was. Researching that problem, I found a free Linux program [Admin: link removed: we don't want to link to password cracking programs] that would retrieve the passwords, so I downloaded it, burned the ISO to a CDROM, ran it, and it worked like a charm. This was my first example where Linux saved Windows.

But even after entering the Recovery Console, nothing seemed to work and the NTLDR error remained. Meanwhile, backups were not current so I really wanted to get the data files off the disk if possible before reformatting the disk and reinstalling Windows. But the Recovery Console wouldn’t allow access to the user files, and the Windows installation CDROM would not of course run by itself. As a last resort, I booted from an old Linux/UBUNTU 7.10 CDROM that I had received last year but never tried. To my amazement, UBUNTU came up, running from the CDROM drive. Furthermore, it recognized both my local network and my USB flashdrive, and I was able to copy all the files from the laptop to my desktop and save them. This occurred with ONE (1) CDROM and my network was recognized with NO intervention or any other action on my part. I couldn’t believe it. This was my second example where Linux saved Windows.

Finally, my reinstallation of Windows took the rest of the day with TWO CDROMS (system and drivers) plus web updates before Windows would recognize my network.

I am very impressed with Linux/Ubuntu and from now on will keep a Ubuntu CDROM available for those situations where Windows refuses to boot. My wife’s laptop is now back up and running Windows, but I am seriously considering more investigation of Linux/Ubuntu as a cheaper and more trouble free replacement for Windows.

Thanks again for your advice in the past and I hope that the tip of keeping a Ubuntu CDROM available will be of help to others.

 

Hi Roger,

I too am a fan of Linux however, monetary no one can deny it's cheaper but there is one major hidden cost. How much do you value your time?

Yes when linux is running smoothly you will be very happy with your financial output, it's only when things go wrong that you begin to realise just how much effort is involved in learning the basics. Windows has the same flaws but IMO there's two (important) things that differ the two operating systems...

1) Windows is less complicated (at the command line) ergo easier to learn

2) Due to a combination of 1) and the fact that more people use Windows there is more places to turn to for help when Windows goes bad.

I would still persevere with Linux though and perhaps you, I and others can make inroads regarding 2) and eventually (due to open source 1) ).

 

Sorry Tony,

But yes you've hit the nail on the head, there is only a (very) few shells for windows, mainly compatable with DOS.

The problem (and beauty) with linux is even if you state you are using Ubunto or Suse or Redhat (you get the picture ) you then have to state what windows manager you are using (Gnome, KDE etc) and then to a lesser extend what shell you are using (bash etc). Don't get me started on kernels

The good thing is you pick what you like, the problem is your system is unlikely to be the same as others, therefor finding assistance to specific problems is not as easy as saying "I have Win XP SP3"


I am a fan of Linux, and to be honest the only reason I still use windows is because so many people that I assist use windows. I particulary detest having to buy a system and removing windows from it, few manufacturers (though they are increasing) sell systems with no pre-installed windows OS.

 

I have the impression that ubuntu and probably redhat and suse all have a fairly active users group so that there is at least some resource for problem solving. Is that correct? But obviously no other OS will have as many users as Windows.

 

I'm sure they do (in fact I know they do ), however what about the 10's (approaching hundreds) of other flavours?

And even if you're using one of the major players, what window manager (of the tens or hundreds available) are you using?

And even if you're using a common (is there such a word in LinuxWorld) flavour with a common manager, What shell (out of the tens or hundreds available) are you using?

Shall we speak installing software? What's best for your system, tarball source, DEB, RPM.

Will we discuss library versions, which software depends on which libraries? Sure RPM and DEB (and a few others) do a good job but none are perfect.

Do I really need to speak about kernels

My point is...

The beauty of Linux is you have choice, it's not left to some megacorp that eventually decides when you must upgrade. (My opinion).

The downfall of Linux is there is too much choice, hopefully most people will converge on similar systems but is that not a walk toward the MS way?

Either way perhaps this thread is better in General Discussion rather than Windows XP?

 

For my two pennies worth:

Basic Unix syntax is fairly standard, and for many day to day tasks, you use the same sets of commands from distro to distro.

However, the GUIs are getting better and better all the time and I find myself reverting to shell less and less.

Where I would agree with wildfire, is that if something breaks, I do find it harder to fix in Linux. I also find it harder to clear out stuff that's no longer needed. However, a lot of that is that I have a lot less familiarity with Linux than I do with Windows systems.

Its strange but I think Linux is hardest for the intermediate user. For beginners and people that just want a platform for e-mail, browsing and office document creation/use, the latest Linux distros are great and work fine right out of the box. I'd happily install Ubuntu on my mum's system and not expect any more problems than she has on her Windows system.

When it starts getting a little hard work, is as you start to want more from the OS and you start installing more complex programs and application. Until you really get experienced with Linux, that can be hard work. The information to help you succeed is usually out there, but you often have to work hard to find it and you can spend some time going up blind alleys.