Re: GPL traitor !

[David Kastrup]

chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:

>> David Kastrup belched:
>>>
>>> chrisv writes:
>>>
>>>> Seriously.  You're full of it, and you're wrong, Fuddie.  As usual, your
>>>> FUD does not fly.
>>>
>>> I don't think he is wrong here.  
>
> Well then, you're wrong, too.

And likely a "Fuddie" as well.

>>> Even if you know the details, you can't tell what ratio of the
>>> slowness is attributable to inherent CDROM access, what ratio is
>>> attributable to bad paging algorithms acerbated by the CDROM (which
>>> would still have an impact when using hard disk), what is
>>> attributable to a suboptimal storage layout and what is pure OS
>>> creep.
>
> Do you really think that "ratios of slowness" need to be calculated?
> Sheesh, man, you're running off a CD.  You can hear it and see the
> results.

And?  There are live disks that install in 15 minutes on a good system.
There are live disks that take 2 hours (take the TeXlive DVD).  There
are differences in layout and effectiveness.  As I said: the CD
exacerbates the situation.  If the result is worse than expected, it
might point to the access patterns being worse than expected, and that
may well reflect on the installed system performance.

If you don't get it, don't be sad.  At least you can sling mud
competitively.

>>> I am not exactly unversed with computers (having written my own
>>> bootstrap loaders and BIOSes and target compilers and whatnot).  And
>>> still I was quite unsure what difference to expect when installing
>>> Knoppix on hard disk as compared to running from CD.
>
> So?  Is it not reasonable to assume that a PC operating system would
> be "reasonably responsive" when installed on a modern PC?

If you never have been exposed to Microsoft operating systems, probably.
But since the market leader does not meet that expectation, many
experienced computer users will not take it for granted.

-- 
David Kastrup