Re: Has The performance been forgotten?

[Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam whitemice org>]

> I don't know how much effect it can have,
> I don't know how many times it has been commented,
> I don't know what can I do for an improvement,
> But I know...
> Working with a computer is not enjoyable when it responds slow!
> | TIMES TO RUN  |           |           |           |           |           |
> |      IN       |   SuSE    |  RedHat   |  Windows  |  Windows  |           |
> |    SECONDS    |    9.1    |   9.0     |  XP(SP1)  |  98(se)   |           |
> |  boot before  |           |           |           |           |           |
> |    login      |           |           |           |           |           |
> |               |     62    |     54    |     22    |     20    |           |

Have you been sure to disable all the services that are started by
default on most distro's but for no equivalent exists in the workstation
version of XP, and certainly not in 98?  Also WinXX cheats, it shows you
the login before it is actually done starting all the services, hence
the hang upon login or reaching 'start-in-lower-left' and not actually
being able to do anything.

I'm not saying Linux shouldn't boot faster; I'm just saying your
comparing ables & oranges.

> |               |           |           |           |           |           |
> |               |  (YaST)   |           |(Computer  |           |           |
> |  management   |           |    n/a    |Management)|    n/a    |           |
> |               |     15    |           |     2     |           |           |

You're right.  YaST is horrendously slow.  Even on a jillahertz
processor.  But that has nothing whatsoever to do with GNOME.  I'm
afraid this will always be true due to UNIX's/LINUX's legacy of a
bazillion-text-file configuration mechanism which makes config tools
large and complex; not to mention a real PITA to write.

> |               |           |           |           |           |           |
> |   command     | (Konsole) |(Terminal) |(DosPrompt)|(DosPrompt)|           |
> |    prompt     |           |           |           |           |           |
> |               |     7     |     2     |     1     |    < 1    |           |
> |               | (Kwrite)  |  (Gedit)  | (WordPad) | (WordPad) |           |
> |  text editor  |           |           |           |           |           |
> |               |     15    |     3     |     1     |    < 1    |           |

Again, very much apples-n-oranges.  Comparing a terminal (bash?) window
to DosPrompt or Gedit to WordPad is completely spurious.  The former in
both cases offers several orders of magnitude more functionality.  A
couple of seconds here and there is a small price to pay for tools that
aren't borderline useless.

> - I am shouting not because I hate linux, but because I hate negligences hurled
>  at it so far!
> - I know many people will suggest me to have a fast xxxx MHz CPU: No, I suggest 
> programmers to test their programs on an xxx MHz CPU to see what they
> have created! 
> These are my computer specifications:
> Ultra high speed CPU: AMD K6-2+ at 550 MHz,
> Extra high end GPU: nVIDIA RivaTNT 16MB PCI,
> Super high speed SDRAM: 512MB PC133,
> Seagate 120GB 7200rpm + Western Digital 120GB 8MB buffer

Are you sure, under LINUX, that you've hot DMA enabled and running your
IDE bus at 66?  Often, for safety, they default to minimum standards.  I
always have the change idebus=33 to idebus=66 on a SuSe install.

> Windows98-SE + WindowsXP-SP1a + RedHat-Linux-9.0 + Suse-Linux-9.1