Ralph Smeets wrote:
> > has run for 3h33m CPU time. The total for ALL the other
> processes is about 3
> > minutes.
>
> Hmm,
>
> what are you doing on that machine?
As little as possible ? Reading/writing endless MD emails ?
> to. Add to that that most 'deamons' (little programs that
> are loaded into memory
> during the start-up of Windows) need more memory than the
> Linux equivalent.
>
> OS overhead is a real problem in this case.
I agree that OS's can have a considerable MEMORY overhead, and if you don't
have enough, this can then affect the speed if you get into swapping, but an
ATRAC algorithm would have a small working set (demand for memory), so I
wouldn't expect the OS to make a big impact. I'm not intending to digress
into a Linux/Windoze comparison. Yes, you need to buy enough memory to
satisfy the demands of your OS to run the programs you want.
> Ralph -> are we still on-topic?
Barely; I suppose we're spinning around the feasability of executing ATRAC
on a PC. Rat had suggested that a PC is 600 times too slow. I don't think
that is the case.
simon
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
