On 25.03.2016 18:53, Anton Aylward wrote:
On 03/25/2016 01:25 PM, Aaron Digulla wrote:
Am 20.03.2016 um 21:25 schrieb Anton Aylward:
I'd prefer is the process with the focus wouldn't get disturbed by other processes. That feels like a good heuristic. In absolute terms what you're asking for is OS8, CP/M, or early MS-DOS,
On 03/20/2016 03:39 PM, Aaron Digulla wrote: that is a single talks "operating system'. No, what I'm asking for is an OS which doesn't feel laggy. I have a supercomputer under my desk and neither Windows nor Linux are able to make it feel "snappy". That's sad. Yes, the kernel scheduler may have an influence, but my experimentation with a desktop system that isn't also doing much in the way of 'server' stuff is that trying to tune the scheduler is a a waste of time.
I just wanted to look at the kernel because my favorite game started to act up when I upgraded my *-desktop to a *-default kernel when I went from 3.6 (I think) to a 4.x. Another sad fact: It's very hard to tell why a system is feeling laggy. Is it the graphics driver? Memory subsystem? Some other process or thread that hogs the CPU? A lot of code seems to come from "we must not waste a single CPU cycle". It would be nice if kernel developer started to look at self-healing code which checks for certain "odd" conditions and then collect the data necessary to solve them when they occur. Case in point: My hibernate issues with 4.5. I could probably set up a serial console. I could probably add a second computer to process the data. And then I could spend a couple of days to try to find the issue, if I had some help. With modern systems becoming ever more complex, I don't see this happening. I'm spoiled by smartphones which just work (most of the time). They have background processes which track the health of the system and report issues back to the developers without me even noticing. I know that the technology is also abused to track people (which buttons do they press and how long, etc). A way to turn this on and off would be nice. But as more non-technical people are dragged into this and as the technical people are losing their footing, software has to become smarter, more resilient and easy to debug -> a software needs to monitor the system state, enable logging for detected problems and then notify the user that something needs attention.
Don't you ever wonder why some of us get pizzed off at newbies who could have found the answer by a simple 'go google!"?
To ask google, you need to know what to ask. If you have a black screen, there is little that a newbie can do. If the software says "there was an error" or "error #23987453", that doesn't help. Then we have nice graphical error dialogs where you can't copy&paste. And lastly, Google will just dump a lot of text in your lap. If I put myself into it, I can find what I need. It just takes some time. Then it takes time to try various fixes until I find one that works. Then it takes time to write that down, in case it happens again. I'm too old to spend my time freely. So instead of blaming the newbie for their lack of knowledge and interest, I'd prefer an approach where newbies wouldn't have to get as far as complaining. Human brains simply work the opposite way: Stress goes up and intellectual prowess goes down. Up to a point where you're so frustrated that you can't think anymore. If you feel "pizzed" about the way every brain works, you're doomed. The human brain won't change in the next 100 years. Software has to give. Regards, -- Aaron "Optimizer" Digulla a.k.a. Philmann Dark "It's not the universe that's limited, it's our imagination. Follow me and I'll show you something beyond the limits." http://blog.pdark.de/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org