Windows performed better - what am I doing wrong?!
Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Windows performed better - what am I doing wrong?!
I recently installed Mandrake 8.1 on a Pentium 150MMX with 48 Mb RAM, 4 meg video and 2GB hard disk. To my surprise, the performance in the GUI is mind-numbingly slow. It literally takes 5 minutes to boot, shells and 'windows' take several seconds to load, and the the poor old thing is basically chugging like it is in pain.
What blows my mind, is that I installed Mandrake replacing Win95, which while nowhere near lightning speed, performed significantly faster on this machine. Obviously I've done something wrong since I've been told by everyone that Linux performance at its worst is several time better than Windows, but I'm not sure what I did. As you can tell am I a total Linux newbie! Also, half my hd seems to be missing - bad partition? Thanks!
that is your problem.. a 150mhz, 48 megs, 4 meg video card.. that machine is slow.. X will need more to run.. you have to think to yourself, win95 is only 40 megs total install, mandrake 8.1 can be over 2 GB... it wasn't designed to run the GUI with a computer that old using linux or especially mandrake..
if you don't run the gui interface, i bet it runs fast at the command line..
Thanks for the reply trickykid. I recently tried out BeOS on this same machine and the performance was fantastic - are there any (gui) versions of Linux that can perform comparably, or with a computer with my specs is Win95 the only other option?
Yeah, linux is better performer than windows, and the things you heard are true, unfortunately, this is not GUI interaction perfrmence that was measured, it is a performence of little things that make the system tick, the core (kernel) of linux is by far leaves behind windows even on slower computers, think for a sec, if we are going to measure the performance of 2.0 GHz Pentium system running windows XP and Sun Blade 1000 with a single sparc 900 MHz with Solaris 8.0, you might say 2G is faster then 900M, wrong!!! Even Pentium 3G (which is not out yet for a several month from now) is falling behind sparc 900MHz.
And sorry for floating between linux and UNIX, but UNIX is a very close relative of linux.
Originally posted by endif Thanks for the reply trickykid. I recently tried out BeOS on this same machine and the performance was fantastic - are there any (gui) versions of Linux that can perform comparably, or with a computer with my specs is Win95 the only other option?
No it isn't. I've got MDK (not 8.1 but 7.2, the idea is the same) on P120. It's running fast. Why? You don't need more than a half of the services that are starting at boot. Run linuxconf and remove the ones you don't need (Control panel -> Control service activity).
Then, the X part. Have a look at all window managers you have installed (or install all there are on MDK cds) and choose the one you like best. If you still have doubt between KDE and GNOME, choose GNOME (but without Nautilus).
Originally posted by Mara
No it isn't. I've got MDK (not 8.1 but 7.2, the idea is the same) on P120. It's running fast. Why? You don't need more than a half of the services that are starting at boot.
Absolutely! To back up what Mara said further, Win 95 is built for one specific task: to provide you with a basic GUI desktop (insert evil vindictive about how poorly it performs this task).
The Linux distros come by default with mail servers, web servers, FTP servers, port watchers, firewalls, tons and tons of goop enough to turn your machine into its own mini-Yahoo.com or fly the space shuttle!
Lately, since disk, memory and clock cycles have gotten cheaper, the default has been to have a ton of this stuff running. If you shut off what you don't need, AND run a lightweight windowmanager, AND if you want to go berserk and run a little older and less bloated distro, AND re-compile your kernel really slim, Linux will leave flame trails out of your ethernet cable. Okay, maybe not, but it will probably outperform Be, maybe.
I've heard a fair bit about older machines that can't handle new distros. Have you tried Xubuntu? I think that one works well on older computers, the only drawback is that it looks nothing like a familiar Windows desktop.