"Timothy W. Stone" 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.
Hi, everybody
Some weeks ago I put the same question and someone of you told me that I
was comparing different kinds of apples. HE WAS RIGHT.
I re-made my measurements and I can say that Linux is as fast as WIN95.
I am using Linux as Home PC, I mean power-off and power-on many times on
day.
I have a dial-up link through phone-line, a color printer, CD, sounds.
System is Cyrix PR233 with 64 M of RAM.
First I made the same video resolution in Win95 and Linux :800x600 16bit
(I have a S3Virge with 2M). Secondly I installed RH 5.1 with minimum
options suitable for a Home PC and KDE.Then I put same release of
Netscape and StarOffice on Win95 and Linux. I think this is fair to
compare.
The results are:
Linux WIN95
time from power-on
to login 20sec
time from startx 15sec for KDE
to desktop 8sec for Afterstep
Total....................35 or 28 sec..............35 sec
loading Netscape 7 sec 15 sec
loading StarOffice 35 sec 15 sec
loading workbook(6 sheets) 10 sec 10 sec
The first time when I was telling Linux is slower I made the mistake to
compare WIN95 with RH 6.0 configured with all modules (because I wanted
to practice a network and a server).
StarOffice is a little slower to load but then it works in the same
time. To make StarOffice to work fast, the first condition is to have
enough memory. I had to buy another 32 M RAM to avoid StarOffice to swap
and now it works fast.
Just for the record, is someone willing to make same measurements for
Debian ?
Regards,
Cristian
