Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Windows boots fast? Really?

__/ [Ray Ingles] on Thursday 09 February 2006 14:05 \__

>  So my niece is over at our house last night to help my wife with some
> baking and such, and I'm going to give her some help with her math
> homework. She's got some courseware loaded on her laptop, and we boot it
> up. I didn't time it, but I'd have to say it took this 1.5GHz, 256MB RAM
> machine running XP Home over four minutes *minimum* to boot up to the
> login screen, and then at least three minutes after clicking the login
> icon before the system was settled enough to run any applications.
>  "Yeah, my computer's pretty slow," she admitted. "And sometimes it says
> it's out of virtual memory, whatever that is."
>  Yup, spyware all over the place. Literally, no fooling, two *dozen*
> processes running under her username before a single app was launched. I
> didn't even bother to try to eliminate it, I don't have that much spare
> time. I told her about Ad-Aware and Spybot S&D and wished her luck.
> Maybe next time she comes over we'll set them up scanning and go do
> something else while they run. She's definitely going to be switching to
> Firefox.
>  She's got enough spare disk that at some point I'll set up an Ubuntu
> install for her and see if she likes it.

Rest  assured that even a clean and properly-configured Windows box  slows
down  considerably  after some software installations. That  fallacy  that
Windows  boots fast should be taken with a barrel of salt. It neglects  to
take  into account an important fact: Windows out-of-the-box, which  boots
up  quickly by all means, is a naked and non-functional tool to work with.
To  use  an equipment-type analogy, base SuSE is like a pitchfork  whereas
base Windows is like a pool cue for plowing a field.

Once  you load up a dozen decent-sized applications, assuming the hardware
specifications  above  and Windows XP, a 3-minute load time is rather  all
right.  I have seen Windows XP machines that take around 5 minutes to boot
and  log  into. With Linux, things scale differently as the notion of  the
Registry  is  non-existent. I have seen colleagues who warn others to  ab-
stain  from install anything on Windows boxes because it slows them  down,
even  after re-installation. WTF! Neglecting the issue of inexpensive disk
space, has humanity come to the point where software diversity and satura-
tion entails a penalty? Could it be Microsoft's little trick for deterring
third-party software from replacing the rust?


Roy S. Schestowitz      |    Warning 0x12C: ispell feels tired
http://Schestowitz.com  |    SuSE Linux     |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
  2:15pm  up 23 days  9:31,  11 users,  load average: 0.09, 0.17, 0.15
      http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index