Can't run linux on Acer Laptop?

[Sup3rkirby]

After asking around and even going to acer(who 'doesn't support linux or linux drivers') i am left here. I have a fairly new Acer laptop.

dual core amd turion 64 processor with 2gb ram and an ati radeon x1250 graphics card(set at 896 mb of video memory) and a 160 gb hard drive.

Now, I have an acer pc and an old acer laptop. Both can run linux. the new acer pc also uses the amd 64 bit processor.

I have tried just running a live cd as well as running it on a virutal pc. I've tried it from an iso and from a cd/dvd. My computer(laptop) will crash and bring up the bsod(blue screen of death) and do a memory dump after about 30-60 seconds of incredibly slow run speed while sitting at a black screen. it never manages to actually load linux. i can get to the screen where i choose to run / install, boot from hard drive, etc. etc.

I've also tried a ton of distributions. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Sabayon, DSL, Feather, etc. Nothing works, plain and simple. I am completely unsure why linux can't even run, not even as a live cd. I'm using the x86 cd/dvd versions, but these work fine on my other acer computers as well as my two pcs that use 64 bit amd processors(one is dual core just like my laptop).

The only real difference between my new acer pc and new acer laptop is the processor for pc is athlon and the laptop is turion. So does the turion not support linux? or just not the x86? If someone could suggest something and hopefully also suggest a small distro of linux that has different version(x86, x64, ppc, etc.) so I can try. I find the DSL distros hard to navigate through, using that directory format with all of the isos in one place. So there might be a 64 bit one in there...

 

[DarkenProject]

Well I know for sure that Ubuntu supports Turion laptops: I'm posting form my HP dv5215us right now, which is running Turion64 single-core. I'm using Ubuntu 7.10 (gutsy gibbon) x86. Everything went okay with me until wireless, which I got working with the ndiswrapper.

What is the specific model Acer you are using?

 

[HomerJ]

Most (if not all) linux distros will run on those processors. Most (maybe all) distributions offer an x86 version. They are usually optimized for i686 (pentium pro or newer, AMD equivalents as well).

Your processors are definitely x86-compatible and able to support i686 optimizations. In other words, it should work. They may or may not be x86-64 compatible (very likely that they are), but I still wouldn't try that unless you know. They are definitely not PowerPC (ppc), so don't even try those.

The BSOD is strange, linux doesn't do a BSOD. It does a kernel panic.

For a recommendation, I would go with the Gentoo Linux minimal CD. If it doesn't work, almost nothing will. It is command-line only, but you can use it to try to see if you can boot linux.

 

[Sup3rkirby]

I'll definitely give that a try.

And the BSOD isn't from a linux boot, just when I use any virtual computer software and try to boot linux under a virtual PC. It lets me choose an option(run or install ubuntu(or whatever distro)), then it will make the virtual computer full screen. this is when I noticed things got incredibly slow. Even if I alt+ctrl+del the mouse movement is less than 1 fps(so incredibly slow...). So I can't ever really even close the virtual pc. then i end up with the BSOD and a memory dump...

 

[HomerJ]

So, are you running linux on an virtual machine? It shouldn't be a problem if you are, linux is pretty versatile. If you are, perhaps you could try downloading a pre-configured system for that machine.

 

[QueenHawkeye]

I have an acer laptop and I had issues trying to run ubuntu with it.
Are you using the latest verison of linux/ubuntu/whatever?

My laptop didn't like me running an older verison so I had to download and burn the newest one. Then I didn't have any problems. Except that if it goes to sleep mode, it somehow shuts itself off after I wake it up. :nuts:

 

[inkblot]

Did you try looking up your model on here?

The most common problems come from acpi. Usually on laptops, you have to add items to the boot options. Google's your friend.

Sorry if I'm stating anything that you've already tried.

 

[Sup3rkirby]

inkblot, thank you for that link. My model, the Acer Extensa 5420, isn't on that list... So this might just be helpful.

I will also try what QueenHawkeye said and download the latest version of Ubuntu(or another distro) and see if that does anything.
Edit:
hmmmmm.... ok, so the BSOD is being caused by a 'ATI Radeon Graphics Card Driver'.

I downloaded the newest version of Ubuntu(7.10) from Ubuntu's website. I got the x86 Desktop version(there isn't a 'laptop' version for anyone who had a thought). Same thing happened just like always. I chose to run or install Ubuntu. Then a few seconds later the window switches to full screen(always done this and only on my laptop, don't know why). I wait about 30-60 seconds and bam, BSOD.

I have updated direct X, my ATI graphics card and gotten windows updates as well. This is the same graphics card that is in my PC, but Linux runs fine on my PC...

 

[Fahad]

I tried installing Kubuntu on my brothers PC (AcerPower with Celeron D), but the LiveCD wouldn't work past the splash screen. Maybe it's common to Acers bought within a specific time period?

BTW - Ubuntu and Kubuntu are exactly the same. The ONLY difference is whether they use kubuntu-desktop and kdm, or ubuntu-desktop and gdm

 

[mygorillanet]

I know someone with an acer running on the same processor. He is using Mandriva Power Plus. Have you tried that distribution? He seems to just loooo-ve it.

good luck!

 

[Fahad]

Slackware is guaranteed to work on any computer that is capable of running Windows 98 or above (preferably can run XP, but Slackware will run off a half gig disk and 4mb ram!)

 

[DarkenProject]

I just thought of something about my laptop:
If you're laptop is widescreen, some of the newer Ubuntu installs have a small bug. The resolution of the splash screen is not set to the monitor's native and therefore won't show up. Theres a fix here.

For a while, I thought Ubuntu wasn't loading, so out of frustration, I left it on a blank screen overnight. When I woke up, it was at the boot screen. Try that and see if you're having the same problem.

 

[Sup3rkirby]

Umm.... well DarkenProject, that does seem like a possible problem, but my computer is crashing when I run any version of linux on a virtual PC.

I did find something wonderful though. VMware seems to be a nice solution. I'm not actually using VMware(well, sort of but not really). Moka5 is something I just found that is basically Virtual PC software that runs on a flash drive. It is pretty cool and uses the VMware player to run or really display the virtual machines. It is completely portable but whenever you use it on Vista it has to install... not really a bad thing though, just loses portability on Vista.

So whether it is the Moka5 engine or the VMware player, this software seems to be the solution. And actually, the performance of my Virtual PCs are impressive. Yes I have a nice PC and all(plenty of RAM, good graphics and a nice processor), but still, going from failure and errors to incredible speeds and no errors is nice.


I just thought I'd post this for anyone who has problems getting virtual PCs to work on their PC or laptop. Moka5 seems to work so you can google that(or realize that the website would be moka5.com).

 

[nynoah]

I would not try to run an x86 version of Ubuntu on your AMD laptop. The X86 is optimized for a intell chipset. Download the AMD 64bit and try that.

 

[HomerJ]

I would not try to run an x86 version of Ubuntu on your AMD laptop. The X86 is optimized for a intell chipset. Download the AMD 64bit and try that.

The x86 one will likely be optimized with -march=i686 and the amd64 one with -march=x86-64. Both are generic and will run almost equally well on Intel and AMD platforms. It wont make a big difference in performance, and the tradeoffs of using the 64bit architecture can make it worth sticking to the 32bit one.

 

[Sup3rkirby]

I feel like the topic is dead, but as I keep finding new information, I also feel I must post. There might be someone who searches(people still do that?) and finds this topic.

So even though it wasn't his point, nynoah was on to something that I discovered today. I simply needed the x64bit version of a linux distro. I'm not sure why I threw that out so early without trying it? Guess I didn't have the time to download a CD image(slow DSL here). But I got Kubuntu 8.04(with KDE 4!!!!) today and by chance found wubi. This basically is something that download ubuntu for you and puts whatever dektop environment you choose in your installation. You pick the 'HDD' size and set the admin name and pass. Then you can run Ubuntu on your PC without partitioning anything. I actually didn't get that to work, but the program downloaded the 64bit version automatically.

Since a program determed that I should run 64bit, I figured, let me burn that iso and give it a shot.


Worked like magic. No problems what-so-ever. Now I just need some wireless card support and I'll be good.


I think the reason my AMD Athlon 64 X2 processor(PC) could run the x86 versions and my laptop couldn't is simply that. The processor(AMD Turion 64 X2). I guess the turion processors simply weren't meant for x86 distros.

 

[whitebus]

I've also used Knoppix cd's on Acer Travelmates without problems.
Good to hear you got the 64bit working.

 

[sathyabhat]

@Sup3rkirby VirtualPC is the worst choice for virtualization, VirtualBox or VMWare is much betteR!

 

[Darasen]

As an FYI laptops in general are far more fussy than desktop machines. One of the main reasons is that a laptop replaces some hardware components found in a desktop with a software equivalent instead. This saves space power consumption and heat in a laptop. This is one of the reasons tha a laptop will always be slower than a desktop with the same specs.

If another OS is unable to emulate the function of this replacement software the system will not run properly.

In your case most likely there is a bit of instruction with the shiped OS telling the CPU to operate at 32 or 64 bit mode.

 

[HomerJ]

I think the reason my AMD Athlon 64 X2 processor(PC) could run the x86 versions and my laptop couldn't is simply that. The processor(AMD Turion 64 X2). I guess the turion processors simply weren't meant for x86 distros.

All AMD64 processors are fully backwards compatible to x86 and even as far back as the 8086. You could throw an old MS-DOS on it and it would work (well, to the degree that DOS ever worked, which is very little). The point is that that can't be the reason.

You must have just had some bad luck with the x86 versions. It happens, sometimes software just won't work for absolutely no apparent reason.

In your case most likely there is a bit of instruction with the shiped OS telling the CPU to operate at 32 or 64 bit mode.

That's not quite how it works. This is actually why they are fully backwards-compatible. The machine boots in 16bit real mode every time. The software then switches into 32bit mode or 64bit long mode. No matter what software ever did, it will always boot into the 16bit real mode, and never go into 64bit long mode until software makes that decision.