Peter M. Groen wrote:
OK. I guess the performance issue was discussed earlier (I remember a discussion around 8.3 or somewhere in that timeframe), so why is it still sluggish than? If SuSE tries to win the desktop (As they told during the Linux Expo), I think they should do a better job at the performance. If it's yast or configuration related: fix it. Find a way to get it right instead of relying on fast hardware. If it's codesize or code optimizing related, again: fix it. They have a reputation to keep. (And I haven't even mentioned the fact that I paid around EUR 100,= for each and every version of SuSE )
-- Peter M. Groen
<STUFF DELETED> I haven't tried RedHat for years and I only tried the first beta of Fedora core on an old slow P-II/333/64M +2M video laptop, so I've only read articles reporting that RedHat outperforms SuSE, but haven't seen any figures. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2004-February/msg03049.html says that Fedora works out the processor and installs accordingly. SuSE ships i586 only for 32-bit and I wonder if that is where the difference lies. My x86_64 XP3000+ laptop running at a slower speed outperforms this XP3000+ 32-bit box on stuff like kernel compiles and I've put that down to optimisation. My gentoo box optimsed for Athlon with a XP2000+ seems snappy enough, perhaps only seems. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Keen licensed Private Pilot Retired IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support Specialist Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks