R U sure that your Linux install actually 'detects' & knows about the 128
Mb of RAM that u have ? I being a newbie too realized that Linux happily
assumed that I had 64Mb of RAM until I put in "append='mem=96M'" in
lilo.conf ! Try this,replacing the 96M with 128M. It should work. I have
had great results with Netscape in Linux vis-a-vis Win 98. I too have a
dual boot system and find that especially downloading is BLAZING fast with
Linux.
INIGO
At 15:03 21/02/99 -0600, rude bwot wrote:
>hi linx gods
>
>relatively new 2 the linux world and loving it - but there's a rumble in
>
>paradise - a rumbling hard drive that iz.
>
>i am using :
>redhat 5.1
>kernel 2.0.34
>Xfree86 3.3.2 (mach 64 server)
>
>on a:
>AMD 350
>128MB SDRAM (100MHZ bus)
>ATI rage II video card (AGP, 8meg)
>
>as expected - machine iz fast - i've got win98/linux dual boot.
>win98 iz on the master drive of the primary controller.
>linux iz on the slave drive of the primary controller.
>128MB swap partition iz on the master drive.
>(cdrom iz on secondary controller)
>
>Now - all iz good EXCEPT when i run netscape (4.05) on linux
>and have more than 2 or 3 netscape windows open (i really havent
>played around with much other X apps) .
>
>The windows take a year and a day 2 repaint, the response of the
>mouse 2 user input iz appauling and the h/d grinds away like crazy
>as if i only had 8MG of ram instead of 128MB of 10ns SDRAM.
>
>Being a linux wanna be - i wuz tolerant of this - until a friend (pc
>illiterate friend) came over - and wuz using netscape on linux - now
>she iz accustomed 2 netscape on windows - (on a slower pc) - it
>was then i realized how bad the performance of X/netscape really wuz
>
>i haven't run any tests - but netscape on win98/95 iz NOTICABLY
>faster than on linux. (same pc)
>
>question iz: what am i doing wrong? or iz this just 1 of the trials of
>life
>us OS deviants have 2 live with???
>
>oh - don't think this matters - but i am running XFCE as my window
>manager (perfomance seems 2 b better than FVWM - i hate FVWM
>anyways)
>also my resolution iz 1280x1024 - 16million colours (24bpp) - as
>comparative analysis - win98 iz using the same resolution 2.
>
>i really do hope someone can give me some pointers in the rite direction
>
>(my friends r still in a state of shock that i have windows installed on
>my
>PC - AND i actually still use it - i'm a disgrace 2 the linux
>community!!)
>:)
>thanks in advance to all who respond...
///////
(O) (O)
-------------------------oOOo--( )--oOOo-----------------------------
This Email comes to from: + Address : 19/E,Ripon Street
+ 1st Floor
IGNATIUS NAYAN D'ROZARIO + Calcutta 700 016
Phone : 229 1767 + WEST BENGAL
Pager : 9628 303387 + INDIA
Email me at : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send a Cc to : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------oooO--------------------------------------
( ) Oooo.
\ ( ( )
\_) ) /
(_/
