Possibly if you got rid of ALL server and logging software running in
the background you might make KDE 2.2 run almost as well as Win95, but
it would mean disabling crond, sendmail/MTA, syslog, atd, [x]inetd and
all the other things which makes Linux more useful than Windows for me..
It's obviously more accurate to compare Linux to NT in this case.
Donncha. refusing to bite :P
Oleg Rasskazov wrote:
>> On Tuesday 18 September 2001 11:28, you wrote:
> > Not sure, but possibly because of the "pre-linking" trickery being done
> > to load things faster. Apps/libraries are I presume being kept in memory
> > much like the taskbar in Windows, so more memory may be used.
> > I haven't run KDE2.2 on a machine with less than 192MB of RAM.
>> Does it mean that win95, which run smoothly with 16MB of RAM is 196/16=12.25
> times better? :)
>
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
