On Tuesday 29 June 2004 03:29 pm, Fred Miller wrote:
On Tuesday June 29 2004 3:04 pm, peter Nikolic wrote:
[snip]
all i can say is you gotta have an hardware issue somewhere then cus it IS faster than 9.0 on as you have seen me post several times relativley minor hardware here plus loaded down with seti units ect
IF it's a hardware issue, and I don't think it is, it HAS to be a very common piece of firmware. MOST of the installs I've done, there are quite a few, have ended up being slower than 9.0. Yes, there are a couple that are about the same. Further, there's VERY LITTLE that's common to these desktop systems, if anything.
Fred
Would there be some kind of test you could tell me (us) about that appears very slow to you? So we can try it for ourselves in various configurations? I can run either an SuSE kernel or a vanilla kernel on either 9.0 or 9.1. Might prove something. I was thinking along the lines of how long it takes OO to come up but that would vary a lot based on disks, RAM, and cpu speed.
-- "Ballmer is no more designed for the art of persuasion than the Abrams tank is for delivering meals on wheels."
-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 06/29/04 18:02 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "Prosperity is when your conversation changes from car pools to swimming pools."