Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/02/18/19:14:47
> Well, I think I am in a position to post a comparison, having used Windows
> '95, Windows NT and Linux on the same Pentium 133:
>
> Win95 + Winamp - 20% processor usage, jumps/pauses now and then
> WinNT4 + Winamp - 10% processor usage, smooth whatever
Thankyou - someone else with a not-top-of-the-range computer who understands
what I'm talking about.
> Now, when it comes to memory, NT uses more, but give it 48MB and it's
> a happy bunny. Windows 2000 needs much more AFAIK.
Yeah - well, I'm running Win2000 with 64 Mb of RAM and it's a very happy
bunny. What I don't understand is how when it's idle, with no applications
running, the task manager reports the memory in use as 46 Mb - how can it
use so much just for its kernel + explorer?
> You should find links to all the popular Linuces. Personally I use
> RedHat, but I tried Debian (briefly, like for a few hours). There
> are lots of different distributions. Which one you choose is up to you.
What are the differences between all the different versions? What are the
advantages of each distribution?
> If you're on JANET, I don't think it'll be a problem.
Ahh yes, all hail Janet and its 300k/sec downloading ;-)
> There's a Linux mirror at Sunsite
> (ftp://sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk/packages/linux/).
And also at http://www.mirror.ac.uk which seems to be faster for me.
> Er, not especially in my experience. I've installed it about five or
> six times and I don't think it's gone smoothly yet.
Ah. If the install fails is it easy to get the system back, or will it trash
the boot record?
> > 3. Will it install on a FAT partition, or does it need its own type
> > of partition?
>
> You can do either, I think. UMSDOS is the phrase your looking for if
> it's going to be on a FAT partition. It's probably better to give it a
> separate ext2 partition, to keep it separate.
What is UMSDOS? Is it included in the distribution or do I need to get it
seperately?
And the only reason I would want to install to a FAT drive is to be able to
read the files on the drive from DOS - creating a Linux partition would mean
the files were only readable under Linux. Same reason I don't use NTFS with
Win2000 :-)
> Windows NT is rock solid in my experience. I've only seen about five or
> six bluescreens in four-five years, and none of those were on my machines.
I take it you've seen the famous photo of the airport departures screen ;-)
http://members.xoom.com/dosuser/windows/bscreen1.jpg
Although I think they might have been running '95.
> It has to be said that with all this OS vs. OS stuff, I still find that I
> use all the GNU tools on all the platforms I use. It seems that GNU
> will outlast most OS's ;)
Let's hope it does ;-) Keep it real, keep it free. Respect.
- Raw text -