Jose M. Sanchez wrote: > This is not true. Linux does not have the overhead of Windows. > > It may SEEM to be slower to you because the application you are running > may have more memory overhead than an equivalent one in Winblows. This > is why the "Gurus" are quick to point you towards a "lightweight" GUI. > KDE is still rather large, though the next release promises to finally > optimize it.
I have some figures (below) for AbiWord under Linux and Windows, and I timed one Linux application (which I can't recall off hand) that takes 1 minute and 5 seconds to load -- I don't remember it probably because it's long gone, although the name may come back to me. Here are links to my figures: * http://www.abisource.com/mailinglists/abiword-dev/01/February/0118.html (fairly subjective -- no stop watch timings) * http://www.abisource.com/mailinglists/abiword-dev/01/August/0475.html (topic is slightly different but timings are still useful for Windows / Linux comparison -- unfortunately the mail archive seems to have condensed the white space in the tables so they are a little hard to read) -- I've reposted the table below.) Note the difference in times for AbiWord in Windows vs. Linux. Almost the same code -- not much difference in memory overhead, if any. Here I repost that table with white space -- see the original post for relevant notes: <quote> Action Windows Linux Open AbiWord 3.3 secs 4.8 secs Open new blank document 0.75 secs 1.8 secs Open IE5 1.0 sec na Open new blank window 0.5 sec na Open Konqueror na 10 secs Open new blank window na 4 secs Open Word97 3.9 secs na Open new blank document almost instantaneous na </quote> I can run Windows95 and Office97 adequately on a Gateway Colorbook laptop with a 486dx50 and 8 MB of RAM (500 MB hard drive). (It's slow to load, but stays ahead of my typing and commands after loading.) I wouldn't think of trying to install or run Linux/KDE. > > However in a one to one comparison, Linux usually fares better. > > Try running Blender on Linux and in Windows on the same system. (or > Maya) These are both "heavyweight" 3D applications. Linux normally > outperforms Windows in my experience. As it happens, I've never used Blender or Maya. Don't seem to have a use for them. Maybe some day. > > |I'm > |hoping someday Linux will be better in this area. > |(I'm sure that Linux gurus reading this would point out that > |you can use light weight GUIs (like BlackBox or IceWM) or the > |Linux command line to get better performance.) > | > > By the same token, I have at a minimum 4-8 separate "desktops" available > to me in KDE. As a result I can leave things simultaneously running on > each desktop and barely notice the application load. > > It's not unusual for me to bring up Maya or Blender and render on one > desktop, PAN and download "stuff" from newsgroups in another (for 8 > hours at a time!), & surf and read E-Mail in a third while listening to > MP3's. In windows I'd need three systems to get similar performance. > > So for me, Linux is far faster and useful. > > If Linux seems slower, then something is amiss. See below -- come fix it (please) -- it's basically a "stock install" (in expert mode so I could choose packages) of Mandrake 7.2 with MandrakeFreq. I've had similar results with every installation of Linux I've tried, among them Caldera 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4, RedHat 5.2 and 6.2, Mandrake 6.2, 7.0, 7.1, 7.2, and some others that I installed only long enough to say that I did (things like Slackware, TurboLinux, StormLinux.) (Clearly, not all of those included KDE 2, I'm not even sure any more if all of them included any version of KDE, but I think they did. Caldera 2.2 was my first "permanent" Linux installation, and IIRC, it was my impression there of GNOME vs. KDE that made me stick with KDE. I should probably check out GNOME again some day.) > > Soapbox on: it's pointless to compare a P-II computer w/64 megs of RAM > running Linux with one with 256 megs of RAM in Windows of the same > speed, as many people insist on doing... The comparison is between two computers with identical motherboards, comparable CPUs (233mhz (Windows) vs. 200mhz (Linux)), comparable hard drives (same rpm, size, seek times). One runs Mandrake 7.2 with MandrakeFreq which updated KDE to 2.1 -- it has 128 MB of RAM. The other runs Windows 95 (IE5) with 64 MB RAM. I typically have 12 to 30 windows open in Windows ("on the desktop"). Linux is slower with any number of open windows. (This despite my observation back on 20010203 -- see the first link above.) When I switch windows (or open a new IE window) in Windows, the response is instantaneous, in Linux, the "sewing machine" starts. I've shut off all the services I can, and am basically running only an Apache server (for my local LAN -- i.e., I'm the only client) -- it's not running Samba, NFS, FTP, bind, postfix, portsentry, and a host of other things I've disabled. Randy Kramer
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
