Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release.... - Linux

This is a discussion on Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release.... - Linux ; http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1 "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different tests certainly weren't what we had expected. " Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well. Wonder why that is? -- Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31

Thread: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

  1. Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1


    "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different tests
    certainly weren't what we had expected. "

    Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well.
    Wonder why that is?

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  2. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    atbdyl122mnu.10bsl6jcj199c.dlg@40tude.net on 10/28/08 11:55 AM:

    > http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1
    >
    >
    > "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different tests
    > certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >
    > Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well.
    > Wonder why that is?


    This is typical of any big project as it becomes more full featured. OS X
    was actually a counter example for a while, but that was largely because
    10.1 was so amazingly slow in so many areas... and 10.2 was better but still
    had a way to go. By 10.3 Apple finally had its act (mostly) together in
    that regard.

    A big part of Apple's next release is to re-do things based on current
    hardware abilities. Maybe it is time for Linux to do the same... though how
    much of that is needed in Linux compared to Windows or OS X I do not know.

    --
    .... something I'm committed to work on, focusing increasing amounts of
    resources of Canonical on figuring out on how we actually move the desktop
    experience forward to compete with Mac OS X.
    - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)


  3. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:02:32 -0700, Snit wrote:

    > "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    > atbdyl122mnu.10bsl6jcj199c.dlg@40tude.net on 10/28/08 11:55 AM:
    >
    >> http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1
    >>
    >>
    >> "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different tests
    >> certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >>
    >> Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well.
    >> Wonder why that is?

    >
    > This is typical of any big project as it becomes more full featured. OS X
    > was actually a counter example for a while, but that was largely because
    > 10.1 was so amazingly slow in so many areas... and 10.2 was better but still
    > had a way to go. By 10.3 Apple finally had its act (mostly) together in
    > that regard.
    >
    > A big part of Apple's next release is to re-do things based on current
    > hardware abilities. Maybe it is time for Linux to do the same... though how
    > much of that is needed in Linux compared to Windows or OS X I do not know.


    Agreed, but the Linux idiots in this group, like Kohlmann for example deny
    that Linux is getting more bloated and thus slower.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  4. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    1wixol4hghosz$.1t41rz34jrawr$.dlg@40tude.net on 10/28/08 12:09 PM:

    > On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:02:32 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    >> atbdyl122mnu.10bsl6jcj199c.dlg@40tude.net on 10/28/08 11:55 AM:
    >>
    >>> http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    >>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different tests
    >>> certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >>>
    >>> Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well.
    >>> Wonder why that is?

    >>
    >> This is typical of any big project as it becomes more full featured. OS X
    >> was actually a counter example for a while, but that was largely because
    >> 10.1 was so amazingly slow in so many areas... and 10.2 was better but still
    >> had a way to go. By 10.3 Apple finally had its act (mostly) together in
    >> that regard.
    >>
    >> A big part of Apple's next release is to re-do things based on current
    >> hardware abilities. Maybe it is time for Linux to do the same... though how
    >> much of that is needed in Linux compared to Windows or OS X I do not know.

    >
    > Agreed, but the Linux idiots in this group, like Kohlmann for example deny
    > that Linux is getting more bloated and thus slower.


    Peter has acknowledged that Linux does not handle the new hardware as well
    as it very well could:

    And* it has nothing to with the underlying "graphics
    capabilities" of linux and/or OSX. The needed capabilities
    are present. In linux, just the CA layer needs to be filled
    in.

    His excuse was that people are not interested in the superior capabilities
    Linux lacks

    I am certain when more than the current 3 users interested in
    those capabilities show up, those will be added ASAP

    Another instance of the absurd circular reasoning used to defend the
    weaknesses of Linux: anything which is noted as a lacking of Linux is deemed
    unimportant because it is not in Linux... the absurd theory being that if
    there was interest it would already be there.

    Look at private browsing... I was ridiculed for talking about the benefit of
    that - until the Firefox folks noted they were adding it.

    Look at a consistent UI... I am *still* ridiculed even though Shuttleworth
    had noted the importance of this. Once Linux actually gains what I have
    been advocating for, of course, Peter and others will brag about the
    advantages it makes over other OSs.

    Peter also "refutes" his own straw man argument of making all Linux desktops
    be "uniform". Big deal.

    --
    Look, this is silly. It's not an argument, it's an armor plated walrus with
    walnut paneling and an all leather interior.




  5. Re: WINDUMMY PISTIFICATION Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    Micoshaft asstroturfing fraudster pounding the sock Moshe Goldfarb
    wrote on behalf of Half Wits from Micoshaft Department of Marketing:



    > http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1
    >
    >
    > "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different
    > tests certainly weren't what we had expected. "


    There is a lot more on the table - and all of those unwanted things can be
    turned off if you want to. I mean running DSL or puppy is about as instant
    as you can get if you want raw speed and a GUI interface...

    http://www.livecdlist.com

    My workstation is now beginning to crawl - not because it is slow but
    because for some time now I can see the benefits of running with 16
    desktops, several virtual machines and doxygenated files clocking up
    a lot disk space. Even SSDs are not fast enough. Dual core is not
    fast enough. I think SSDs need to go up in speed by a factor of 10
    with their own interfaces instead of HD interfaces.
    Next PC is gonna have to be 16Gb RAM quad core, a couple TB of disk space,
    lots of SSD space, better than 1Gb graphics cards with a 30" monitor.

    I can't bear to go near any WINDUMMY PCs. One click and they suck.
    It is astronomically appauling the slow speeds at which they work.
    I have them sitting side by side to support legacy stuff. The quicker
    all this windummy legacy can get booted off my desk, the better it will
    be for everyone me thinks.





  6. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:02:32 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    >> atbdyl122mnu.10bsl6jcj199c.dlg@40tude.net on 10/28/08 11:55 AM:
    >>
    >>> http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    >>>

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different
    >>> tests certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >>>
    >>> Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well.
    >>> Wonder why that is?

    >>
    >> This is typical of any big project as it becomes more full featured. OS
    >> X was actually a counter example for a while, but that was largely
    >> because 10.1 was so amazingly slow in so many areas... and 10.2 was
    >> better but still
    >> had a way to go. By 10.3 Apple finally had its act (mostly) together in
    >> that regard.
    >>
    >> A big part of Apple's next release is to re-do things based on current
    >> hardware abilities. Maybe it is time for Linux to do the same... though
    >> how much of that is needed in Linux compared to Windows or OS X I do not
    >> know.

    >
    > Agreed, but the Linux idiots in this group, like Kohlmann for example deny
    > that Linux is getting more bloated and thus slower.
    >


    The problem Wintrolls have is in comparing their MS OS (any color you like,
    so long as it's black) with the almost infinite choices you get with one of
    the Linux distros.

    So for them to assert that Linux is getting slower is like saying that
    mammals are getting slower.

    --
    Facts are sacred ... but comment is free

  7. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    Robin T Cox wrote:
    >
    > The problem Wintrolls have is in comparing their MS OS (any color you like,
    > so long as it's black) with the almost infinite choices you get with one of
    > the Linux distros.
    >
    > So for them to assert that Linux is getting slower is like saying that
    > mammals are getting slower.
    >


    Mammals do get slower you idiot with age, you animal. You seem a little
    slow.

    What a bunch of COLA lip drivel you driveled out you maroon.

  8. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    The racist, liar and software thief Gary Stewart (flatfish) nymshifted:

    > On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:02:32 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    >> atbdyl122mnu.10bsl6jcj199c.dlg@40tude.net on 10/28/08 11:55 AM:
    >>
    >>> http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    >>>

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different
    >>> tests certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >>>
    >>> Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well.
    >>> Wonder why that is?

    >>
    >> This is typical of any big project as it becomes more full featured. OS
    >> X was actually a counter example for a while, but that was largely
    >> because 10.1 was so amazingly slow in so many areas... and 10.2 was
    >> better but still
    >> had a way to go. By 10.3 Apple finally had its act (mostly) together in
    >> that regard.
    >>
    >> A big part of Apple's next release is to re-do things based on current
    >> hardware abilities. Maybe it is time for Linux to do the same... though
    >> how much of that is needed in Linux compared to Windows or OS X I do not
    >> know.

    >
    > Agreed, but the Linux idiots in this group, like Kohlmann for example deny
    > that Linux is getting more bloated and thus slower.
    >


    You try a Hadron Snot Quark again, flatfish

    The kernel is basically same speed it was.
    KDE is getting faster.
    Overall linux is getting faster, not slower

    Additional services which did not exist before may slow linux down (beagle
    is one example, Obex may be another). If the updater changes, you have no
    way to tell for sure in what way it will change system speed. To have a
    slight chance at comparing speed you need to shut those down

    So, to assert that "linux is getting slower" is simply bull****. Naturally
    you and your ilk, like that incompetent "IT teacher" Snot Michael Glasser,
    have to tell us that idiocy, as you are idiots of the highest degree.
    Without having the slighest clue what actually is different in default
    system setup.

    You guys are sure living up to your role as being utterly clueless and
    incompetent, besides being dishonest usenet filth
    --
    Avoid reality at all costs.


  9. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    49077bbb$0$32671$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net on 10/28/08 1:53 PM:


    ....
    >>> This is typical of any big project as it becomes more full featured. OS X
    >>> was actually a counter example for a while, but that was largely because
    >>> 10.1 was so amazingly slow in so many areas... and 10.2 was better but still
    >>> had a way to go. By 10.3 Apple finally had its act (mostly) together in
    >>> that regard.
    >>>
    >>> A big part of Apple's next release is to re-do things based on current
    >>> hardware abilities. Maybe it is time for Linux to do the same... though how
    >>> much of that is needed in Linux compared to Windows or OS X I do not know.
    >>>

    >> Agreed, but the Linux idiots in this group, like Kohlmann for example deny
    >> that Linux is getting more bloated and thus slower.


    ....

    > So, to assert that "linux is getting slower" is simply bull****. Naturally
    > you and your ilk, like that incompetent "IT teacher" Snot Michael Glasser,
    > have to tell us that idiocy


    In case you missed it from above...

    Snit:
    Maybe it is time for Linux to do the same... though how
    much of that is needed in Linux compared to Windows or OS X
    I do not know.

    And yet you include me as saying I claim to know how much Linux needs this.

    Come on, Peter, that was absurd even for you.



    --
    "If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
    - Anatole France




  10. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    "Robin T Cox" stated in post
    hCKNk.78928$E41.26570@text.news.virginmedia.com on 10/28/08 1:29 PM:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:02:32 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    >>> atbdyl122mnu.10bsl6jcj199c.dlg@40tude.net on 10/28/08 11:55 AM:
    >>>
    >>>> http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    >>>>

    > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different
    >>>> tests certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >>>>
    >>>> Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well.
    >>>> Wonder why that is?
    >>>
    >>> This is typical of any big project as it becomes more full featured. OS
    >>> X was actually a counter example for a while, but that was largely
    >>> because 10.1 was so amazingly slow in so many areas... and 10.2 was
    >>> better but still
    >>> had a way to go. By 10.3 Apple finally had its act (mostly) together in
    >>> that regard.
    >>>
    >>> A big part of Apple's next release is to re-do things based on current
    >>> hardware abilities. Maybe it is time for Linux to do the same... though
    >>> how much of that is needed in Linux compared to Windows or OS X I do not
    >>> know.

    >>
    >> Agreed, but the Linux idiots in this group, like Kohlmann for example deny
    >> that Linux is getting more bloated and thus slower.
    >>

    >
    > The problem Wintrolls have is in comparing their MS OS (any color you like,
    > so long as it's black) with the almost infinite choices you get with one of
    > the Linux distros.


    But you do not have "almost infinite choices". The choices that are lacking
    are the "higher level" choices where a user can opt to have a consistent
    UI... where the distro manager (or user) gets to make all sorts of choices
    that effect the whole system.

    This is just not seen on *any* distro.

    > So for them to assert that Linux is getting slower is like saying that
    > mammals are getting slower.



    --
    I think we [the folks who make Linux desktops] don't yet deliver a good
    enough user experience.
    - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)


  11. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    On 2008-10-28, Linux Pimps wrote:
    > Robin T Cox wrote:
    >>
    >> The problem Wintrolls have is in comparing their MS OS (any color you like,
    >> so long as it's black) with the almost infinite choices you get with one of
    >> the Linux distros.
    >>
    >> So for them to assert that Linux is getting slower is like saying that
    >> mammals are getting slower.
    >>

    >
    > Mammals do get slower you idiot with age, you animal. You seem a little
    > slow.


    I know men double your age that would run you into the ground.

    You are a good illustration of his point.

    >
    > What a bunch of COLA lip drivel you driveled out you maroon.



    --
    Apple: Because a large harddrive is for power users.
    |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  12. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    On 2008-10-28, Snit was urged to write the following:

    > But you do not have "almost infinite choices".


    You do have almost infinite choices. You could choose for a lean minimal
    system with a very light window manager - let's say awesome - and do
    most of your work on the command line. And and the other hand of the
    spectrum you could opt to use e.g. KDE with all it's fancy graphical
    interfaces to use and configure *your* system. Some distros such as
    SuSE and Mandriva even throw in some of their own configuration tools
    for you. You also could install Linux on a stripped down Pentium with
    a custom built kernel, leaving out e.g. video and audio support, and
    interface with it through serial or ssh, and deploy that as a fancy
    router. You could even built your own system completely from scratch,
    using the instructions on linuxfromscratch.org. Do you want
    precompiled packages, ready to use? Fine, pick a Debian based distro
    and enjoy apt-get, with or without graphical interface. You rather
    want a source tree and compile stuff yourself, so you have better
    control over how the software will behave? That's fine too. Just go
    for SlackWare then. Or use FreeBSD. Not Linux, but at least as good.

    And then we're only talking about the OS itself...

    > The choices that are lacking
    > are the "higher level" choices where a user can opt to have a consistent
    > UI... where the distro manager (or user) gets to make all sorts of choices
    > that effect the whole system.


    I still don't get this craving for a consistent UI. It never concerned
    me personally. But if that's what you want, you could pick either
    Gnome or KDE as your DE, and stick with their own applications.

    E.g. KDE installed with all its specific software is more complete
    than Windows ever can be. Let's see... There's the file manager
    Konqueror, which doubles as your web browser, document viewer, CD
    ripper, and what not. Then there's KOffice, which will deal with a lot
    of your office needs. Think it's to light? Install OpenOffice. There's a
    KDE integration package on a lot of distros. What else? Torrents?
    KTorrent it is. Audio? Amarok gets you there. Video? Noatun sucks, but
    Kaffeine is quite good. Video editing? Kdenlive is quite nice. I heard
    it doesn't crash as much anymore as it used to, but I don't know for
    sure as I use Kino, which is rock solid. Shrink a DVD? K9copy. Manage
    your photo's? Err, well I forgot what it's called (I do not need
    anything besides a file manager to manage my photos) but it exists :-p
    And the list goes on. All sharing a similar GUI.

    > This is just not seen on *any* distro.


    It is seen equally on *any* distro.

    --
    The first half of our lives is ruined by our parents,
    and the second half by our children.
    ~ Clarence Darrow

  13. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    TomB wrote:

    > On 2008-10-28, Snit was urged to write the following:
    >

    < snip >

    >> The choices that are lacking
    >> are the "higher level" choices where a user can opt to have a consistent
    >> UI... where the distro manager (or user) gets to make all sorts of
    >> choices that effect the whole system.

    >
    > I still don't get this craving for a consistent UI. It never concerned
    > me personally. But if that's what you want, you could pick either
    > Gnome or KDE as your DE, and stick with their own applications.
    >
    > E.g. KDE installed with all its specific software is more complete
    > than Windows ever can be.


    < snip >

    You are arguing with Snot/Snit/Rekruled/Brock McNuggets/Michael Glasser

    The most dishonest poster known to usenet. He will never admit that there is
    only a (very slightly) inconsistent UI if the user himself selects to have
    it that way. It would clobber his troll "argument"

    Killfile that extremely filthy POS. Talk *about* that stinking vermin, but
    not *with* Snot Glasser. It is useless, he will never stop trolling.
    He is back in my killfile since weeks, and I will see his garbage only when
    quoted. So please stop distributing his filth
    --
    We may not return the affection of those who like us,
    but we always respect their good judgement.


  14. Re: WINDUMMY PISTIFICATION Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    7 wrote:

    >
    > My workstation is now beginning to crawl - not because it is slow but
    > because for some time now I can see the benefits of running with 16
    > desktops, several virtual machines and doxygenated files clocking up
    > a lot disk space. Even SSDs are not fast enough. Dual core is not
    > fast enough. I think SSDs need to go up in speed by a factor of 10
    > with their own interfaces instead of HD interfaces.
    > Next PC is gonna have to be 16Gb RAM quad core, a couple TB of disk space,
    > lots of SSD space, better than 1Gb graphics cards with a 30" monitor.
    >


    Post the output of dmesg, nanobot boi.

  15. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > extremely filthy POS.
    > stinking vermin
    > useless
    > garbage
    > filth


    It's very sad that you reproduced, and that children are exposed to someone
    like you.




  16. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 14:55:06 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?

    page=article&item=ubuntu_bench_2008&num=1
    >
    >
    > "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different
    > tests certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >
    > Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well. Wonder why that is?


    That's as opposed to MS which gets faster and faster with every new
    release. Pretty soon we'll be running vista on an 8086.

  17. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    "TomB" stated in post
    55NNk.83332$WX2.30607@newsfe17.ams2 on 10/28/08 4:18 PM:

    > On 2008-10-28, Snit was urged to write the following:
    >
    >> But you do not have "almost infinite choices".

    >
    > You do have almost infinite choices. You could choose for a lean minimal
    > system with a very light window manager - let's say awesome - and do
    > most of your work on the command line. And and the other hand of the
    > spectrum you could opt to use e.g. KDE with all it's fancy graphical
    > interfaces to use and configure *your* system. Some distros such as
    > SuSE and Mandriva even throw in some of their own configuration tools
    > for you. You also could install Linux on a stripped down Pentium with
    > a custom built kernel, leaving out e.g. video and audio support, and
    > interface with it through serial or ssh, and deploy that as a fancy
    > router. You could even built your own system completely from scratch,
    > using the instructions on linuxfromscratch.org. Do you want
    > precompiled packages, ready to use? Fine, pick a Debian based distro
    > and enjoy apt-get, with or without graphical interface. You rather
    > want a source tree and compile stuff yourself, so you have better
    > control over how the software will behave? That's fine too. Just go
    > for SlackWare then. Or use FreeBSD. Not Linux, but at least as good.
    >
    > And then we're only talking about the OS itself...
    >
    >> The choices that are lacking
    >> are the "higher level" choices where a user can opt to have a consistent
    >> UI... where the distro manager (or user) gets to make all sorts of choices
    >> that effect the whole system.

    >
    > I still don't get this craving for a consistent UI. It never concerned
    > me personally. But if that's what you want, you could pick either
    > Gnome or KDE as your DE, and stick with their own applications.
    >
    > E.g. KDE installed with all its specific software is more complete
    > than Windows ever can be. Let's see... There's the file manager
    > Konqueror, which doubles as your web browser, document viewer, CD
    > ripper, and what not. Then there's KOffice, which will deal with a lot
    > of your office needs. Think it's to light? Install OpenOffice. There's a
    > KDE integration package on a lot of distros. What else? Torrents?
    > KTorrent it is. Audio? Amarok gets you there. Video? Noatun sucks, but
    > Kaffeine is quite good. Video editing? Kdenlive is quite nice. I heard
    > it doesn't crash as much anymore as it used to, but I don't know for
    > sure as I use Kino, which is rock solid. Shrink a DVD? K9copy. Manage
    > your photo's? Err, well I forgot what it's called (I do not need
    > anything besides a file manager to manage my photos) but it exists :-p
    > And the list goes on. All sharing a similar GUI.
    >
    >> This is just not seen on *any* distro.

    >
    > It is seen equally on *any* distro.


    You have a lot of choices but not the choices which are testably best for
    users of all levels - the availability of a consistent user experience. As
    for the idea that the user can roll there own, that is just silly. Clearly
    Ubuntu has been trying and they have not been able to... and it is just
    absurd to ask a user to do a lot of work simply to have a *reasonable*
    choice. Let us put that silly idea to rest. Please!


    --
    Is Swiss cheese made out of hole milk?


  18. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    4907a96f$0$30239$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 10/28/08 5:08 PM:

    > TomB wrote:
    >
    >> On 2008-10-28, Snit was urged to write the following:
    >>

    > < snip >
    >
    >>> The choices that are lacking
    >>> are the "higher level" choices where a user can opt to have a consistent
    >>> UI... where the distro manager (or user) gets to make all sorts of
    >>> choices that effect the whole system.

    >>
    >> I still don't get this craving for a consistent UI. It never concerned
    >> me personally. But if that's what you want, you could pick either
    >> Gnome or KDE as your DE, and stick with their own applications.
    >>
    >> E.g. KDE installed with all its specific software is more complete
    >> than Windows ever can be.

    >
    > < snip >
    >
    > You are arguing with Snot/Snit/Rekruled/Brock McNuggets/Michael Glasser
    >
    > The most dishonest poster known to usenet. He will never admit that there is
    > only a (very slightly) inconsistent UI if the user himself selects to have
    > it that way. It would clobber his troll "argument"
    >
    > Killfile that extremely filthy POS. Talk *about* that stinking vermin, but
    > not *with* Snot Glasser. It is useless, he will never stop trolling.
    > He is back in my killfile since weeks, and I will see his garbage only when
    > quoted. So please stop distributing his filth


    Man, you must *hate* Shuttleworth. LOL!

    Shuttleworth:
    Rather than saying: "GNOME wins, KDE looses" I'd like us to
    say: "How can we get this communities to sit down and talk to
    each other"? ... I'm very interested in finding out, how to
    get those two communities working closer together, how to get
    more collaboration, more sharing. Both at the level of
    technology but also at the level of best practices /
    processes.
    ...
    I'd like to see both desktops focusing on a common
    infrastructure. And we've already seen that, a lot of the
    Freedesktop initiatives have been embraced by both projects -
    HAL, d-bus for instance.

    This also applies to other software projects, if you name
    your project g-something or k-something your are articulating
    a very specific user experience. Projects should really look
    to the whole Linux desktop and see how they can appeal to
    both sides.
    ...
    The fact that OS X is growing, tells us that Windows is
    weakening. The fact that OS X is growing and Linux isn't,
    tells you that OS X is offering things that Linux is not.
    One of those is the pace of change, the level of innovation.
    You really have to give credit to Apple for driving
    innovation.
    ...
    And at the moment we [the free software folks] don't offer
    a particular easy place to go and express your technology.

    Question:
    What do you see as the main obstacles holding back the
    success of the Linux desktop?

    Shuttleworth:
    I think we don't yet deliver a good enough user experience. I
    think we deliver a user experience for people that have a
    reason to want to be on the Linux platform, either because of
    price or because of freedom. If that was your primary reason,
    Linux is the right answer.

    But if you are somebody who is not too concerned about price,
    who is not too concerned about freedom, I don't think we can
    say the Linux desktop offers the very best experience. And
    that's something we have to change, that's something I'm
    committed to work on, focusing increasing amounts of
    resources of Canonical on figuring out on how we actually
    move the desktop experience forward to compete with Mac OS X.

    Shuttleworth:
    Second thing is, we just can't do this only on GNOME or just
    on KDE, we need to figure out on how to move the whole Linux
    desktop platform forward. I suspect if we hire a bunch of
    upstream developers they will be across both GNOME and KDE.

    I think the Apple guys have a very good point when they say
    we should let designers lead the definition of the user
    experience.

    Too damned funny!


    --
    "In order to discover who you are, first learn who everybody else is. You're
    what's left." - Skip Hansen


  19. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > http://tinyurl.com/6evs9l
    > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...nch_2008&num=1
    >
    >
    > "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many different tests
    > certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >
    > Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well.
    > Wonder why that is?
    >


    How's windows's latest release in the speed stakes? You missed that one too.

  20. Re: Linux Gets Slower With Each New Release....

    Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >> "Major slowdowns after Ubuntu 7.04 "Feisty Fawn" in so many
    >> different tests certainly weren't what we had expected. "
    >>
    >> Spamowitz seems to have missed this one as well. Wonder why
    >> that is?

    >
    > How's windows's latest release in the speed stakes? You missed
    > that one too.


    I used Feisty Fawn before upgrading to Gutsy Gibbon. It worked fine.

    Here is its agenda, which is old as the hills and consistant:

    http://tinyurl.com/6m6a8c

    Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    Subject: Re: [News] Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio,
    Fedora Live CDs Interview
    Message-ID: Xns9A7D9779E7902thisnthatadelphianet@66.250.146.12 8
    Date: 11 Apr 2008 18:53:55 GMT


    > Dan, you're probably a nice guy, but we get a ton of "works
    > for me" crap in COLA and most times it's just people telling
    > lies.


    Well sorry to dissapoint you, but I'm not in COLA. I'm reading
    these posts in the Ubuntu group. The only reason they are going
    to COLA is because whomever started the thread had it crossposted
    there...and to Vista groups, which I removed because this has
    nothing to do with Vista.

    I'm NOT a Linux pusher, I still use Windows most of the time
    since I'd just installed Linux a few weeks ago, maybe a month+
    ago, and still checking out apps and learning Linux. There are
    things I like and things I don't like.

    Believe what you want to believe. It's painfully obvious that you
    are completely anti-Linux, just like some are completely anti-MS,
    and have such strong preconceived beliefs that it doesn't really
    matter what anyone says about any particular Linux item,
    everyone's a liar, and nothing works out-of-the-box.
    --
    HPT
    Quando omni flunkus moritati
    (If all else fails, play dead)
    - "Red" Green

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast