Linux

OT: anything goes!

Moderator: Edi

User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Post by phongn »

Gah, MacOS 9 is pretty bad, but it's GUI is much more responsive than MacOS X 10.2. Nothing much else good about it.

I've used OSX in the university labs, but they don't put enough RAM into it, making them slow.
User avatar
Enlightenment
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 2404
Joined: 2002-07-04 07:38pm
Location: Annoying nationalist twits since 1990

Post by Enlightenment »

Wong: there are known scalability problems with Linux. For instance the scheduler can't efficiently deal with more than 1000 tasks (threads or processes). The server versions of Windows cope somewhat better under high thread loads. Obviously the average user will run out of memory long before hitting this barrier, but it is a known problem.

Shep: Win98 compared to Mandrake is an apples and oranges comparison. Win98 is a lightweight single-user client OS. Mandrake is a multiuser operating system with extensive server capabilities. A fairer boo comparison would be between Win2K and Mandrake. Both of which, FWIW, boot in about the same time on my dual boot box.

If you want to get rid of the webfolder views in Mandrake, just dump KDE (or Gnome, whichever you happen to be using) and run some other window manager. You'll lose a fair bit of functionality but Mandrake will run faster.
It's not my place in life to make people happy. Don't talk to me unless you're prepared to watch me slaughter cows you hold sacred. Don't talk to me unless you're prepared to have your basic assumptions challenged. If you want bunnies in light, talk to someone else.
Azeron
Village Idiot
Posts: 863
Joined: 2002-07-07 09:12pm

Post by Azeron »

Why do so many people worry about boot time? Out of your task schedule, its maybe .1% of the time you spend on a computer. Its nice to have a 3 minute boot time, gives you time to head to the snack room or take a piss.

1000 threads? yah sounds about right. What makes a high end operating system work for those million dollar servers makes them crawl along for the desktop versions. Its like comparing apples and oranges.

Imagine having the same system that manges quantums for thousands of threads, work for a system that only ussually runs 50. It is a gross wastes of rescources. T(hats why they are trying to add in interchangeable modules, that you can swap in for high end systems)

Thats why Linux and windows are scaling out, farms of less expensvie servers are better, because you can stick in hardcore servers in with the lot as well. Its more interchangeable, and if anything goes wrong with one of them, its not like yuo have to completely shut down your operations.

granted its a bit, or allot more work to maintain, but distributed architecture is where the future is.
The Biblical God is more evil than any Nazi who ever lived, and Satan is arguably the hero of the Bible. -- Darth Wong, Self Proffessed Biblical Scholar
Post Reply