Installing Linux inside Windows

[stringMX]

is there better ways to install Linux inside Windows XP?
I know two ways:
1) setting up dual-boots between Windows and Ubuntu. A dual-boot, at boot time, will prompt to decide which operating system you want to use.
2) installing Linux on a virtual machine inside of Windows. This requires to obtain VirtualBox software. Also that process requires a huge amount of memory.

Both ways are inconvenient. is there better ways?

[devils casper]

Why both ways are inconvenient for you?
In dual boot, you can share data between Windows and Linux partitions and most of Windows OS alternative packages are available for Linux.

Its really easy to install Linux inside Windows OS but you must have a bit fair hardware.

[stringMX]

yes, both ways are inconvenient, especially 1st method.
That's way I'm looking for better way.

[oz]

Hello and welcome to the forums!

You could install Linux to a liveCD and run it from that since there would be no inconvenience other than booting from the CD itself.

[trutheality]

You have to understand that both windows and linux are operating systems, and as such they are designed to have free reign over the hardware they're running on.

Those are indeed the only two ways to have two operating systems share the same hardware: either pick which one to run when the computer boots, or run one and virtualize the hardware in the other one.
That is why running linux inside a Virtual Machine (e.g. VirtualBox) takes up a decent ammount of memory: you are simulating a fully functional computer inside your already running computer.

This makes me ask what you want to use linux for.

If you want to try it out than a liveCD is your best choice.
If you need to use some linux utilities but want to keep running windows there are tools like cygwin that implement a linux shell inside windows without having a full-fledged virtual machine.
Using a VM is nice when you want a fully functional linux but you don't need it to be running all the time.
Dual-boot is usually good for laptops because they are frequently turned off and on anyway.

Really depends on your needs and what exactly you find to be inconvenient about each method.
It's possible that what you think is a deal-breaker can actually be easily configured to not bother you or to suit your needs.

[Socrates420]

just run the CD in windows

[stringMX]

seems Linux on a liveCD requires fair amount system resources, loads slow on old hardware. Dedicated Linux PC is best choice, I think.

[Rubberman]

This is definitely a case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too... All computing tasks are tradeoffs. You can dual-boot your system so you can boot into whichever OS you want, yet you can still (mostly) access the data on either system (works better from Linux -> Windows than the other way around), or you can run one OS and the other in a VM. My recommendation in this case is to run Linux natively, and run Windows in a VM. Neither situation is optimal. I personally use the second option, Windows in a VM, most of the time, though there are times I want to run Windows directly on the hardware, in which case I have a separate Windows boot disc. How you approach the problem is a matter of personal preference, I think.

[rokytnji]

The Lin'N'WinNewB Project

Is way also. And

Wubi - Ubuntu Installer for Windows

also

[chrisname]

Damn Small Linux has the ability to boot "within" windows.
There is also "Usermode Linux" (UML) which I'm suprised no-one has mentioned -- the README file that ships with every kernel mentions it -- but never mind.