| |||||||||||||
Some changes needed...Some changes needed...Posted Nov 28, 2012 17:31 UTC (Wed) by nye (guest, #51576)In reply to: Some changes needed... by dgm Parent article: Langasek: Upstart in Debian
>Picture yourself having a dual booting machine, say a laptop or a tablet. >You could chose to boot Windows 8 in a couple of minutes or Linux almost >instantly (say, less than 10 seconds). Which one would you boot more often?
One of the things that really upsets me about LWN, and most Linux-related forums in general, is the obstinate refusal to consider minor points like 'facts', preferring to make up random nonsense trashing other platforms rather than ever bothering to make a fair comparison. It's like many people can't think of any ways in which Linux is *actually better*, so they have to make some up.
It's tiresome and childish, and it makes FOSS advocates look bad.
(Log in to post comments)
Some changes needed... Posted Nov 28, 2012 17:56 UTC (Wed) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]
I think this falls to Hanlon's Razor (s/stupidity/extrapolated ignorance/). Windows before 7 *did* have horrible boot performance (ISTR Vista being particularly bad on my school laptop, but maybe that's memories of it souring over time). Once you're under 5–10 seconds, it's really in the "who cares?" realm. Hell, it takes 3 seconds for the cable box my family has to get the picture on the screen after switching channels at home and no one complains. Video game console starting animations can take longer. Five seconds from switch to useful would probably be generally accepted. Windows 7 is there on my work machines (modulo the limbo where services and such are starting up after I log in and whether updates need to be finished installing). CentOS 5 is not by any means. Fedora Rawhide is getting there with systemd (17 seconds from when journald starts logging to my user being logged in at a TTY with manual entry). The best I had seen on my machines before was a ~35 second internet to internet reboot (manual login and ifup wlan0) on an eee900 netbook (either Fedora 13 or 14?).
Some changes needed... Posted Nov 28, 2012 19:18 UTC (Wed) by reedstrm (guest, #8467) [Link]
My laptop makes it from cold start to gdm login screen in 9~10 sec, running bog standard Ubuntu 12.04, by virtue of replacing the system disc w/ an SSD.
Add another 3-4 sec for initial login. Yes, even bloated desktop login is acceptable w/ faster disc IO.
Not that I find boot time that interesting anymore: sleep/resume has been solved, I almost never actually shut down anymore.
My biggest issue is NetworkManager taking its time to decide where I am and getting the appropriate WiFi up.
Some changes needed... Posted Nov 28, 2012 18:06 UTC (Wed) by nye (guest, #51576) [Link]
>It's like many people can't think of any ways in which Linux is *actually better*, so they have to make some up.
NB. I'm not saying there aren't any, just that the most commonly quoted reasons which basically boil down to performance and stability are manifestly untrue in the majority of cases, like this boot time example.
Some changes needed... Posted Nov 28, 2012 22:18 UTC (Wed) by louie (subscriber, #3285) [Link]
Lots of these examples (particularly with regards to stability/crashiness) are really about Windows 95/98/XP, which are the last versions of Windows that many Linux users ran/remember. My first Linux install was done immediately after Word crashed 10-12 times in a single *hour* during a paper I was writing at school. Now I use Word 8-10 hours a day and I can't recall 8-12 crashes in total in the past three *years.* It is really unfortunate that most of us don't realize what we're competing against - it is a very bad bubble to be living/thinking in.
Some changes needed... Posted Nov 29, 2012 14:42 UTC (Thu) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
It was just a supposition to make a point. Would you feel any better should I had mentioned OS X instead? What's all the fuss about?
|
|||||||||||||