On Fri, 03 Dec 1999, you wrote:
> Hi to all:
>
> When I compare the speed of Linux
> (e.g. loading netscape, using star Office)
> to my M$ win98, Linux is slower.
Yes it will be slower loading, but the performance will be higher.
Linux is a "real multitasker" and has to keep things going while it loads other
programs, ie srvice interupts properly, something windows cant do.
>
> This does not match what I'd expect from reading
> most Linux propaganda... ;)
At a first look you will get that impression, however, load up as many programs
as you like in linux, they are all useable at the same time, something else
widows is not good at.
>
> I have a p-200 with 32 MB ram, red-hat 6.1, gnome desktop
>
> Is my system under-equipped, or should I go looking for
> the problem elsewhere?
Memory is a point of disscussion, i used to have just 16 meg, when i placed
64 meg in, (price was cheaper then than now, i got the supprise of my life.
>
> Where/how in the world would I begin to look ?
You could check and make sure you are not running deamons you dont need, most
instalations set evrything upi to be run at boottime unless you tell the
installation procedure not to.
Normaly a windows machine does not have anything running when you start your
computer, it just sits there waiting for you to load a program, linux on the
other hand has then running and waiting.
I am quite sure Lawson Witney will reply to your mail and possably Ray
will as well, they can explane things far beter than i, i tend to get my words
mixed up when explaning technical things.
>
> thanks!
--
Regards Richard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://people.zeelandnet.nl/pa3gcu/
