I agree there are only so much you can do by kernel/os tweaking.  
Applications design and picking
the right light weight apps can get get that speed.  Even application 
tweaking has its limits.

<history alert>
There was a M$ Windows type interface that worked very well on old 286's 
when M$ was pushing 386 as a minimum system.  It was written fully by 
hand in assembly, while M$ windows was C++.  And it was screaming fast 
and reliable.  But no one seemed to care.  "Hardware is cheap" was the 
motto that killed them. But there is always a place
for good, well designed software.  It just may not be where we think it is.
</history alert>

Steven S. Critchfield wrote:
> You can not get that level of speed increase by just the kernel. You
> just don't spend that much time in the kernel. For instance run an
> app with time in front of it on the command line. Do your normal
> amount of activities. When you quit the app, check the amount of
> time spent in each portion of the system.
>
> Most of the apps you are likely to run will spend a LARGE portion of 
> time in the user portion of the system. This means the kernel doesn't
> have much if any effect there. The times the kernel would make a 
> difference for overal speed is possibly if it recovers from idle a 
> bit faster. Specifically if they ramp up CPU speed faster than others.
> but you know, this is a configuration option and most likely a runtime
> option you can set.
>
> Again, this is where the compiler options might make a difference 
> though. If the apps are more likely to give up CPU time, it is
> possible that the govenor will slow the CPU down to conserve battery
> before the next thread pops up and wants time. 
>
> With the huge number of configuration options that are possible in
> the linux kernel and userland, you can tweak it all over the place.
> But I will restate that I doubt that the kernel form one distro is
> actually any faster than that of the others on it's own. When
> combined with all the userland settings too, maybe one can be better.
>
> Critch
>
> ----- "Douglass Clem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> From everything I've heard, the custom Xandros build is tailored to
>> this
>> computer, and on average runs about twice as fast as anything else
>> that can
>> be installed. I think that in specific, they've done a lot of tweaking
>> with
>> the kernel.
>>
>> Douglass Clem
>> crashsystems.net
>> Public Key: http://crashsystems.net/pubkey.asc
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Steven S. Critchfield
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> ----- "Douglass Clem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I'm considering buying an eeePC
>>>>
>>>>         
>> 900<http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834220367>,
>>     
>>>> which is the model with an 8.9" screen, 1.6gz cpu, 16gb SSD drive
>>>>         
>> and
>>     
>>>> 1gb of
>>>> ram. I've heard that the default Xandros distro on it makes it
>>>>         
>> blazing
>>     
>>>> fast,
>>>> with excellent battery life. However, I would much rather run
>>>>         
>> Ubuntu
>>     
>>>> on it,
>>>> particulary this version <http://ubuntu-eee.com>. Why exactly is
>>>>         
>> it
>>     
>>>> that
>>>> Xandros on this machine is so much faster? I figured that part of
>>>>         
>> it
>>     
>>>> might
>>>> be the kernel, so I figured I could install the Xandros kernel to
>>>>         
>> help
>>     
>>>> speed
>>>> things up. Would this work, and is there any other ways to make
>>>>         
>> Ubuntu
>>     
>>>> run
>>>> close to the same speed on the 900?
>>>>         
>>> On a linux box, how could one distro be faster than the other. The
>>>       
>> kernel
>>     
>>> options could have a bit of an effect on it, but not too great if
>>>       
>> the
>>     
>>> app runs mostly in userspace.
>>>
>>> Really all you can do is look at what added applications are running
>>>       
>> that
>>     
>>> shouldn't. You need to also look at what the default compile
>>>       
>> options
>>     
>>> might be.
>>>
>>> You will possibly find that some usability options in ubuntu will
>>>       
>> hinder
>>     
>>> raw compute speed and battery life. You have to weigh those options
>>>       
>> against
>>     
>>> your needs. The good news is you can make any distro perform pretty
>>>       
>> much
>>     
>>> the same as any other with a little bit of effort.
>>>
>>> I would however be hesitant on switching out the kernels from one
>>>       
>> distro
>>     
>>> to another. You might find that some functionality may not be there
>>>       
>> that
>>     
>>> the distro expects. Or worse, the battery life benefits are from a
>>> userspace app helping you manage clock speed that isn't there in the
>>>       
>> other
>>     
>>> distro and therefore not helping you in your quest.
>>>
>>> So finally, don't go mix and matching, just understand the problem
>>>       
>> space
>>     
>>> and the apps that help you conquer the problems.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steven Critchfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>       
>>     
>
>   

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"NLUG" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/nlug-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to