You are here

Run Linux app inside Windows from USB memory stick?

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
ryan14
Offline
Last seen: 12 years 8 months ago
Joined: 2010-03-27 11:27
Run Linux app inside Windows from USB memory stick?

Ok google chrome( http://www.google.com/chrome?platform=linux&hl=en ) runs on Linux. I have Windows ME(millenium) and chrome for windows only works on Windows XP and higher.

Is there a software that can install a portable mini version of Linux onto a USB memory stick, and then install google chrome onto the USB memory stick. Then I could put a google chrome shortcut icon on my Windows ME desktop, and when i double-click on it, it will load google chrome from my USB memory stick?

Vandrvekn
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 2009-01-17 19:30
To the best of my knowledge,

To the best of my knowledge, it's not possible to run a linux program in Windows by itself. You can put a version of linux on a flash drive and run it as a virtual machine in QEMU or other virtualization software. I don't know if any virtual machine software runs in Windows ME, though. Even if you can, it wouldn't be as easy as what you seem to be looking for.

If you really want to run Chrome on a computer that old, your best bet is to boot your computer to linux and run it that way.

OliverK
OliverK's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Developer
Joined: 2007-03-27 15:21
I doubt you have enough RAM

I doubt you have enough RAM on windows ME to run a virtual machine. You need a gig, bare minimum

Too many lonely hearts in the real world
Too many bridges you can burn
Too many tables you can't turn
Don't wanna live my life in the real world

dboki89
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 10 months ago
Joined: 2009-11-30 20:44
.

It's just not that simple, as you would like it to be. Doable, but highly tricky and troublesome.

It is possible to run a Linux distro at the same time as Windows ME, and they will run fine if you have about 256MB of RAM (or more) - if you use Puppy Linux...

But, there's loads of problems and trickiness to it. The easiest (relatively easiest) way to do it is to install something like PupWin98 (that one should work with Windows ME, but may not - don't hold me responsible if it doesn't), and run Puppy Linux like that ( the other link for Puppy website ). Than, all you need is Google Chrome (!!!please don't use that spyware crap, better use it's sibling SRWare Iron!!!) for Puppy Linux.
Note: this is possible with VMware virtual machine and virtually any Linux distro, but I'm assuming your machine is not exactly "state of the arc", since you're running Windows ME...

Now, to explain some things. This is not possible to be made portable! You can't run it portably, it HAS to be installed on the targeting system. It just has to do too many changes to be able to run it from USB drive, and remove it without rebooting and similar. You could, technically, make it portable that it installs to the system, reboots, use it, uninstall, reboot and that would, kinda, be it. But that's not considered portable. And it would certainly leave traces.

Puppy Linux has some drawbacks - the main Puppy distro is limited to a single user account - and it's something called "root". The "root" has more privileges than the "Administrator" on Windows, and it's very similar to the user named "system" on Windows ("Safe Mode" of Win). So, if a virus gets into Puppy (not likely, since not many viruses work on Linux [if any], but it might happen mostly because of user-error), it would be possible for it to erase your entire Windows installation. Most likely is user-error if you are not familiar with Linux. But, on the other hand, Puppy is one of the user-friendliest and newbie-friendliest Linux distros out there - exactly because of the lack of multiple user accounts.

The second problem is finding the proper Google Chrome version (or Iron version) which has to be packaged for Puppy. The official version of Google Chrome for Linux are only for the most common versions of Linux, but these are too "heavy" to be run satisfactorily fast from USB drive.

Third problem is USB speed - Puppy works when running from USB drive, but it's a little slower. For the other Linux distros, most of them will just take too long to boot.

Now, you may have noticed already, but Puppy Linux is pretty much the way to go if you want to make it possible. Are you sure you're that familiar with what not to run? Which commands to never input? What not to install? Since you are logged in as "root", and anything you do can potentially be deadly for your files/system.

On a completely other note, why Google Chrome when it contains spyware parts built in? Use SRWare Iron instead.

What happens when you remove all the user tracking and background services from Google Chrome? You get SRWare Iron, a Chromium source based web browser that is concerned to protect your privacy. Furthermore, it includes an integrated ad-blocker and “easy to change” User Agent.

There are portable versions of both Google Chrome and Iron web browser here in the forums, they might work under Wine? I don't know about that, but if you actually install Puppy Linux on your flash drive, and run it at the same time as Win ME, than you can install Wine (install it to Puppy) and try to run these versions of Windows based web browsers under Puppy.

Now, to conclude this reply. If you decide to do it, it's too much work and too little reward. This is an opinion of a Linux user. It's better if your company allows you to run your own OS (operating system) to boot to some Linux distro which supports Google Chrome/Iron, and use it like that. Depending on what kind of hardware you have, there are loads of Linux distros you could try - if it's a newer machine I recommend Ubuntu Linux, or Linux Mint, or even openSUSE. If it's an older machine, than Puppy is your best bet. They can all be started and used without ever being installed to your computer, and this feature of pretty much every modern Linux distro is called LiveCD. That's what's great about Linux - you can try it out without installing it. You would only have to ask your company/boss if you are allowed to boot to another OS (NOT to install it), and they may just say yes. When you take the CD out, shutdown the computer and most humans won't even be able to notice something besides Windows was ever run there.

Also, if your company is a small one, depending on which programs you need for work, most things you would ever need come pre-installed in Linux, and unless you use some specialized programs, it might be cheaper for you to upgrade to Ubuntu instead of Windows 7. Might be cheaper? Scratch that - IS cheaper Smile Open Office and Mozilla Firefox are just two of the examples. Of course, this is for when/if you get a newer PC - I'm not saying you should buy one.

I hope this helped you, even though it's a negative reply (in a sense of saying "you can't actually do it that simply").
Take care Biggrin

My posts are old and likely no longer relevant.

ottosykora
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 2007-10-11 17:48
intersting

question in fact, when I have seen it, for linux we have all that WINE for running this and that directly, people run even MSoffice2007 well with that, but the opposite way no one tried yet? Probably not many people will use it and so nobody bothers to design such software.

Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland

dboki89
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 10 months ago
Joined: 2009-11-30 20:44
.

Hi ottosykora. Now that I actually got to respond to your reply, I have to say that you are arguably the most thorough explanation-oriented poster on these forums. More than half of my GPG/PGP understanding comes just from reading your various posts on that subject Smile

for linux we have all that WINE for running this and that directly, people run even MSoffice2007 well with that, but the opposite way no one tried yet?

Well, I just have a question to counter yours - "What's the point?". Practically all programs which are made for Linux also have a version compiled for Windows. And if some don't (which is highly unlikely), you can easily compile a Linux app to run on Windows since it will most likely be open source. Theoretically (because "Line" doesn't exist), running a Linux version of some app under Windows will be slower than running a version of that same app compiled for Windows directly. Every app works best with OS it was compiled for. Wine had that funny example where OpenOffice 2.0 for Windows (I'm NOT talking about the Linux version of it!) ran faster on Linux under Wine, than on the real Windows machine, but such examples are rare. It might be an interesting thing to see something like "Line" (I made up the name, it would stand for "Line Is Not an Emulator", just like Wine's name Smile ), but I doubt anyone would take on such a deemed-to-fail project...

Probably not many people will use it and so nobody bothers to design such software.

That is for sure.

Btw, you accidentally (or purposely Blum ) double-posted the same post, with a time difference of 01:15 hours...

My posts are old and likely no longer relevant.

ottosykora
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 2007-10-11 17:48
not by purpose

it is sometimes that something hags on my screen and I come to it after hours and then...

yes clear, the running of apps which do not belong to the os is just for very special cases. So sometimes even I do run my portables from my stick via wine in linux, it is sometimes just convenient.

OK, some people make big effort to run office2007 or even the office2010 via wine, well this also is just half the thing, since writing documents, one can use the open office as well and the actual advantage of MSoffice when run on windows in a company network is the fact that it is connecting 'itself' to this and that and the functionality is highly integrated into the whole network. The MSoffice alone is not more and not less then the open office on an ubuntu.

I think things like wine have some reason to exist and be developed, if linux community expects more people to 'switch over' , then they have to be able to use their software they are used to. We can not expect all 'converts' to go and compile each software again etc.

The opposite is limited to some very special cases like OT, probably also here compilation for windows could help here too, if source available and suitable compiler and knowledge too.

The only way I thought just, was this cygwin. But clearly the use of it is quite different from wine, which an average user of some ubuntu desktop will not even notice that it does some special job.

Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland

dboki89
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 10 months ago
Joined: 2009-11-30 20:44
.

I think cygwin would just be complicating already complex enough things for the OP. The main problem I see here is the use of Windows ME. While there are versions of cygwin for Windows ME still available, I don't know what dependencies Google Chrome has implemented when support for Win ME was dropped. And trying to compile some software is not that easy, as many times it's not well-enough documented... I see you kinda agree with me on that one.

About the portable versions of Win apps ran under Wine on Linux, I actually think that's the safest option, as far as the malware-part goes. If you run into viruses, they'll think you're on Windows, and they'll do nothing to Wine, let alone to Linux installation. I mean, they "might" do something to Wine, but Wine is just too far from perfect for any virus to seriously mess it up. I still remember reading about the jokes of viruses trying to mess up Wine Smile I mean, when Wine gets better, they'll cause trouble on it; for now, Wine is safe from them...

And to add something about OSs. I don't hate Windows (XP and Seven at least), but I dislike their pricing. The only reason to have them is for gaming - setting up a good game for Windows to run on Linux is a PITA. I know the "solutions" for Linux, but they are not all that good. The thing with MS pricing is that if you get a basic Windows OS (any of them) and MS Office, you could have bought a computer twice as good as the current one for the same money. So I agree that something like Wine should be developed, and I plan on helping them out as I can, but Wine is just horribly behind Windows XP. The main apps I needed to run under Wine (the first 5 I've tried) all failed to work. I like the fact that with every version of Wine it gets better and better, and I wait for the day when it catches up to Win XP, and then move onto catching up to Seven Smile I think Wine is the most potent bait for getting more people to switch to Linux! Now, I'm off to fishing (them) }:)

My posts are old and likely no longer relevant.

ottosykora
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 2007-10-11 17:48
intersting

question in fact, when I have seen it, for linux we have all that WINE for running this and that directly, people run even MSoffice2007 well with that, but the opposite way no one tried yet? Probably not many people will use it and so nobody bothers to design such software.

Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland

Log in or register to post comments