[snip] Dont put an end to this thread. Perhaps someone can summarise the points you have made. They are very valid. a. Increase Swap b. Stop services that are not required c. Get More RAM (since lower ram = more swap file usage = slower / inefficient performance) d. Recomend use of less resource hungary software (galeon instead of mozilla) e. Do not fully shut off software that you are going to use again and again (eg, minimise mozilla instead of closing it when you finish looking at a webpage)
An additional point I guess we can also make here is that in MS Windows XP also, most software takes time to open. Outlook express takes more than 20 seconds (and massive HDD Access) to open and MSOffice XP is much worse. We can not compare a PC running Win98 to RedHat9. That comparison does not make sense.
[snip]
Talking of the preloader of mozilla in Windows, can we have a *generalized* pre-loader in linux ?? I would say it wouldn't be too difficult to write a daemon that preloads stuff and keeps general statistics as to which executable/library is used the most. This would increase the booting time by little but the net result should be quite surprising in my opinion. IE starts so fast in windows is because just about everything that it requires is preloaded when windows boots. On the other hand most of the stuff that mozilla needs is loaded when it is started.
Taking up the proj. anyone ?
I might do so, but let me know if it would really make a difference.
C
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.com
Buy The Best In BOOKS at http://www.bestsellers.indiatimes.com
Bid for for Air Tickets @ Re.1 on Air Sahara Flights. Just log on to http://airsahara.indiatimes.com and Bid Now !
Sometime Today, linuxdev assembled some asciibets to say:
IE starts so fast in windows is because just about everything that it requires is preloaded when windows boots. On the other hand most of
Actually, IE starts up fast because it has already started up. Remember that IE is the file manager for windows - it runs the desktop.
Oh, yeah, more than 50% of the time that I've run IE, it has taken longer to start than Mozilla Firebird.
On 24/01/04 20:43 +0530, Philip S Tellis wrote:
Sometime Today, linuxdev assembled some asciibets to say:
IE starts so fast in windows is because just about everything that it requires is preloaded when windows boots. On the other hand most of
Actually, IE starts up fast because it has already started up. Remember that IE is the file manager for windows - it runs the desktop.
How about comparing IE to Konqueror startup in a KDE environment?
Devdas Bhagat
----- Original Message ----- From: "linuxdev" linuxdev@indiatimes.com To: "GNULinux Users Group Mumbai India" linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 3:35 PM Subject: Re: [ILUG-BOM] RE: Why does Linux access the HDD so much?
Talking of the preloader of mozilla in Windows, can we have a
*generalized* pre-loader in linux ??
I would say it wouldn't be too difficult to write a daemon that preloads
stuff and keeps general statistics as to which executable/library is used the most.
This would increase the booting time by little but the net result should
be quite surprising in my opinion.
IE starts so fast in windows is because just about everything that it
requires is preloaded when windows boots. On the other hand most of the stuff that mozilla needs is loaded when it is started.
You mis understood. I was not comparing IE with Mozilla. I consider Mozilla's performance far superior to Mozilla. What I was saying is that mozilla on windows has a fast loader facility. The same mozilla on Linux, made by the same team, does not have the facility. That is my crib. I can understand 2 different groups / teams not providing a feature which one of them has, but the same team ? Perhaps it is becuase they had to do it in windows as the first version of mozilla was not popular on Ms Windows platform due to its start up time. On Linux, people used it anyway
Regards Saswata