Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (4749 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] Linux Performance vs. Windows XP perfoprmance.
  • From: Alex Daniloff <alex@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 08:51:17 -0700
  • Message-id: <200305141551.h4EFpHh07134@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hello,
Don't you think it sounds quite ridiculous?
How did this guy measure speed of WinXP vs. Linux?
With the choronometer - (ready, set, go! on bootup), series of
perfomance tests, or just subjectively to his own feelings
and the mood of the moment?
Do you really care which system boots faster?
Linux can run for years without rebooting, WinXP as well as its
previous versions has a recommended time period for so called
"maintenance" reboots.
In my own experience a had a Linux server (connected to UPS of course)
which ran for four years without rebooting. I had to take it down only
when CPU's heat sink fan got busted.

Alex


-------------------
> I met a guy at a Windows Server event yesterday. He told me that he
has
> a 2.4GB Athalon with 2GB of memory. He tells me that it is slow to
load
> (eg. sluggish). And, in his own words:
> "Windows XP boots faster, is more responsive, and the GUI is
> quick compared to what has happened in the Linux releases of the
last
> year".
>
> He initially had been using GNOME, but switched to KDE (Red Hat 8).
> Also, he built the kernel optimized for Athalon. The one issue I
don't
> know is whether he is using DMA or not.
>
> He is considering using SuSE, but I would like to see if anyone on
this
> forum can add some insight based on the scant bit of information I
have
> posted. My home system is a 700Mhz P3 and my laptop is a 1.2Ghz P3.
> Mozilla and OpenOffice tend to be slow to load because they are
huge,
> but I don't see any sluggishness.
>

< Previous Next >
References