The big problem with Ubuntu is not so much the OS itsellf, but the applications. So all you know to do is slap Ubuntu on he netbook, not knowing first thing about Linux obviously. For you, it might — for me, in this specific case? XP is the winner for me.
But hey, I am a man of science, and I want to see something with my own eyes before passing judgement. Maybe I already looked over all the offerings, and concluded that none of the 3G modems included work flawlessly on Linux? Ext2 is indeed not a journaling filesystem, but it is getting quite venerable now and it has the worst performance of filesystems that you could choose for Linux.
Note that FAT32 is not one of them. The difference is so screamingly obvious — the Firefox user interface is supersluggish on Linux. Did you use ext2 on SSD? Of course, you must have had very slow performance with ext2! It has been around for quite some time now and jffs3 will soon replace it. I can also say that the wireless speed was better under WinXP. That probably helped Firefox to be faster. Precisely so. Uhm… What are you guys complaining about? You guys would have a point if I used a log-structured filesystem on Windows, but not on Linux, and then compared performance of the two.
The next step is setting up a striped volume across the SSD and an SD card, which supposedly gives a massive speed bump. TXT 8. It has been heavily cludged since then, but it still lacks even elementary features needed by a modern OS.
Good luck with your system security running with FAT, Thom. It just happens to work tolerably well with SSDs. Almost by accident, really … certainly not by design.
So if you want to actually compare speeds, and you yourself have said that you believed writing to the SSD by firefox was the cause of the slowdown. BTW, if this were true, would happen in Windows to the same extent as in Linux, since firefox is the same codebase. So if you actually wanted to draw a fair comparison to Linux, you should actually use a filesystem that can support Linux and also happens to be suitable for use on a SSD.
That is all, Thom. No-one is having a go at you … rather just pointing out the disjoint in your logic where you seem to have concluded that XP is faster when in fact what you did was compare XP on a cut-down capability and hence faster filesystem to a hobbled Linux install that was nowhere near as tuned to your hardware.
In your hurry to defend Linux-no-matter-what like you do in every story on OSNews, you made a generalisation that I most certainly did not make anywhere in the article. Of course, as always, your mileage may very , especially on other types of netbooks with different specifications.
You make it sound like linux and Windows are equal and should be equal. However, you should make it clear that linux is slower when used just like Windows, not when you use it as it should be used. You can not modify one bit on a SSD, you have to modify and merge the whole erase block. On the other hand, seek time is negligible.
This is very different than floppy. On the other hand, a file system specifically tuned for SSD will take advantage of the good features and mitigate the bad features.
With jffs2, you can also have your data compressed and the compression is tuned for erase block size before writing, which makes it significantly faster than writing the raw data.
On the other hand, a file system tuned for slow computer will not use compression because it will slow down the system significantly.
A little bit slower booting and shutting down time, but not that bad because all data is written in one chunk, and that makes the erase block problem less of a problem. Also choose and tune your applications wisely. When you try to compare windows and linux, you are wrong since the start. Comparing Ubuntu to Windows makes some sense, but comparing linux to Windows is dead wrong.
You overlook the fact that linux is a kernel. Choose the right tools with linux and you will have the right system. You can use whatever with linux, whereas NT There really is no end to your inability to properly read and quote sources, is there? Let me quote it for you. Hint: it has nothing to do with performance or being fit for the job.
So, uhm? When you try to compare the two, you are wrong from the start. No problem man, be happy with Windows. I was just pointing, as a comment to your article that you used linux incorrectly and that there is an alternative to Windows for performance: use linux correctly.
This comments section is horrible. Thom put time in trying to get it to work. By bleating that he was incompetent and should have done this and that you are basically making the point that Linux is harder to use, and are doing so better than any Microsoft astroturfer could. Thom is not some computer newb. By telling the world that he is to blame for his Linux performance deficit on the Aspire, you are making it clear that ordinary computer users with little experience in alternative OSs have no hope of getting Linux to run acceptably on a mid.
On the eee forums, users of the 16G version of the without the fast 4gb drive seem to be of the consensus that it seems to be unacceptably slow with Windows but fine with Linux. Acer made a mistake and inappropriately used the ext2 filesystem for the SSD rather than jffs2 or logfs. What is wrong with you?
Why do you keep putting words in my mouth that I never used! Where did I say so? Same thing with the fat32 vs.
This is why we have benchmarks, or at least an article regarding the new interface for small laptops from ubuntu or a look at the new filesystem in linux designed for SSDs. So did you mount the FS in Linux with noatime or relatime? A slow SSD is probably where this bring the biggest savings.. Yes: If you used BeOS you know that most all? Not hard to believe.
The anything-but-Microsoft people may not like it but Windows is the most usable operating system for older computers.
Yes, there are distributions like DSL but they are generally too different and too hard to use. It caches all changes to file system to RAM at sector level my understanding. If you need to save changes you can commit them manually or automatically on some condition. Of course this adds some complexity to daily usage.
Edit: URL linking too confusing for me here. Wow what a neat article. I really like using the Asus EEEPC and seeing all the neat little libretto style notebooks appear on the market and all the neat things you can do with them.
I wish I had more money to experiment with more of these neat little machines. Why remove Linux and install XP? It seems like a hassle compared to just buying the Acer One with XP pre-installed. It probably was. Not quite the hassle, and both Linuxes seem to work reasonably well, but neither gives full use of both card slots.
It also has a 3-cell battery … 1. That was the disappointment for me, in addtition to the attempted lock-down of Linux. It also has a sealed case. I also wanted to obtain this image with the least fuss and possible problems as possible - hence not fiddling with the MBR Ah, I read this too late. Joakim, I'm happy to upload my MBR record but whether it will work for your system is a different matter.
The MBR is very 'disk specific' so it would be at a "at your own risk" type thing. I'll upload it in a few days once I get my hands on the backup file again Andrew, thanks for your effort! However, yesterday I managed to sort things out. Thank goodness for gpart utility!
Unknown said…. Qsr Nrwn said…. Interesting post. It inspired me to take some steps further for backing up and restoring the partition and making a post with the process involved. Just visit my blog. Hi, I use Norton Ghost That was even shorter than the 2 hours and 31 minutes of endurance found in the Gigabyte MV. The Acer Aspire One's On our Wi-Fi tests, it pushed data along at a rate of This translated into a snappy Web-surfing experience: The photo-heavy Cracked.
We also had no problem streaming video from Hulu. The touchpad is small and the vertical buttons are awkward, but we prefer the Aspire One overall because it offers a superior keyboard and much better bang for your buck. In the suddenly crowded field of mini-notebooks, the XP version of the Aspire One offers the best value.
Laptop Mag. Home Reviews. Our Verdict. Against Short battery life Awkward vertical touchpad buttons. Laptop Mag Verdict.
0コメント