Do you feel that too?
Today I was at my friend's workplace. He's using Vista. I didn't rumble about Linux, but I couldn't not notice one operation. He drag and drop a file from desktop on to recycle bin. The amount of time needed for this operation to complete was enough for me to start thinking 'Does Recycle Bin do something new in Vista? Isn't it just for so called deleting files?'.
It took at least 6 seconds to delete (move to trash) 23kb file.
Well, it's good to know that some people are living healthier (lower blood pressure) just cause they are using Ubuntu (or any other Linux OS) -> link.
And, really, often I have to work on a Windows machine and every single time I start too many applications. I mean, come on, firefox, thunderbird, irssi, gaim, couple of terminals, xine movie and some music. This is easy and normal on Ubuntu. Is that really too much to ask on Windows? If I even try to do a half of this on Windows I'll get nervous (cause everything stales at random moments), or some apps won't even start. And everything is lagging. I mean, really slow... Doh... Windows users often look at me while working on Windows, and have some 'smart' comments like 'Let it boot. Wait, it's not booted yet.', 'Why are you moving windows so much?', 'Do one thing, than another...'.
Is it only me?
It took at least 6 seconds to delete (move to trash) 23kb file.
Well, it's good to know that some people are living healthier (lower blood pressure) just cause they are using Ubuntu (or any other Linux OS) -> link.
And, really, often I have to work on a Windows machine and every single time I start too many applications. I mean, come on, firefox, thunderbird, irssi, gaim, couple of terminals, xine movie and some music. This is easy and normal on Ubuntu. Is that really too much to ask on Windows? If I even try to do a half of this on Windows I'll get nervous (cause everything stales at random moments), or some apps won't even start. And everything is lagging. I mean, really slow... Doh... Windows users often look at me while working on Windows, and have some 'smart' comments like 'Let it boot. Wait, it's not booted yet.', 'Why are you moving windows so much?', 'Do one thing, than another...'.
Is it only me?
posted by ivoks at
23:04
14 Comments:
Yes. Windows Vista does something different. I believe it uses Shadow Copy or something like that so that you can roll back the state of any file to any time previous. File system versioning or something like that. It also has search and indexing on by default... combine the two and everything gets s-l-o-w.
By
Jim, at 11:26 PM
It is not only you.
By
Anonymous, at 11:46 PM
Not to mention Vista implements a fully atomic version of NTFS, which could have some catastrophic impacts on performance (similar to how our near-atomic ext3 data=journal mode sends write speeds into oblivion)
But no, it's not you -- many operations in Vista seem to have gotten mysteriously slower or otherwise costlier. I'd rather try to find a plausible explanation for these things rather than vista-bashing... but unfortunately with documentation nowhere in sight an educated answer is hard to come by.
By
John Dong, at 12:30 AM
It's not only you, Windows is a headache.
By
Anonymous, at 12:50 AM
The culprit is not shadow copy, differential storage, or the search&indexing services. No idea what it is but disabling all those completely does not really help. (It does a little but it's still slow tbh) There's something else wrong.
I still however use my Vista happily as it offers me a few things I care about that (Ubuntu) Linux does not and doesn't seem to be doing in the near future. Vista has got couple annoyances but the annoyances are still smaller.
By
Anonymous, at 12:51 AM
P.S. And YES, Windows's sluggish multitasking abilities was the FIRST reason I moved to Linux 5 years ago... I was appalled at the fact that my then-shiny P4 1.4GHz could not keep up with me running XP, despite any level of prioritizing and micromanagement I tried to do with Task Manager. I tried Knoppix for one afternoon and was ASTONISHED at how responsive that system was even though it was running from a CD.
I wanted to hope that Vista would fix the NT scheduler to be more responsive ,but that is far far from the truth. It seems to respond to a few heavy CPU-pegging programs a bit better, but overall the system becomes very sluggish and uninteractive if I, say, start a compile job or start encoding some movies, etc.
I run Linux, FreeBSD, and OS X on a regular basis and none of those systems has any of Windows's issues with multitasking.
By
John Dong, at 12:57 AM
I'm an Ubuntu user, a member of a translation team and a Free Software aficionado... but I have to say that some events/apps/moments in Ubuntu are really slower than in Windows (XP).
By
Anonymous, at 4:14 AM
Watched my boss struggle with Vista, as it was pre-installed on his shiny new laptop. Had to laugh when he had to navigate through four (4) dialog boxes, just to create a folder in "C:\Program Files".
Didn't take them long to install Ubuntu on it. Although that came with its fair share of hiccups also, required some tweaking to support all the on-board hardware.
Once installed though, Linux "just works".
By
Anonymous, at 5:23 AM
Could it be that you don't have enough RAM? I do a lot of multitasking on Windows (XP at work, Vista at home) without any problems (I'm a software developer for a Northrop Grumman). I also run Ubuntu Feisty Fawn at home, and the multitasking speed seems about the same (but then again, I remember the abysmal multitasking performance that Windows 9x had, if you could even call it multitasking). On my Vista box I have 4 GB. My XP box at work has 2 GB. Granted, the Ubuntu box I have has only 1 GB and its pretty zippy.
I personally don't mind using Windows - proprietary software and DRM matters aside, but if you find yourself forced to use Windows instead of Linux, then you may at least want to turn off System Restore, Windows Defender, and Disk Indexing. That will save you a lot of RAM and constant disk access. If you really need anti-spyware protection, NOD32 is an execellent anti-virus/anti-spyware package which is also very small and fast (although not free).
By
Anonymous, at 5:33 AM
This isn't Vista issue. Windows XP, 2000; I'm always afraid to start too many programs. I never get that feeling with Linux (which I'm using since '97.).
I'm not talking about slow applications; yes, Firefox is one of the worst applications for Linux (and if you ask me, we should all boycott Mozilla and move to KHTML - Mozilla is just ignoring Linux platform). I'm not talking about hardware problems.
The problem is, as john dong said, NT scheduler - which is PITA. I'm not saying Ubuntu is perfect, but I don't have familiar feeling when I sit in front of Windows computer, I just don't. I'm always afraid and nervous about outcome - and it's always right feeling :/
Northrop Grumman - yes, maybe 1GB of RAM isn't enough for Vista, but wait a moment. 1 GB of RAM! That's a lot. Can you imagine what 1GB of RAM is? 5 years ago it was normal to design planes on computer like this. Now you can't even run operating system?
By
ivoks, at 7:25 AM
o, yes i have exactly same kind of frustration every time I have to use Windows. Boot time is to f... long, and the worst thing is you don't know when it is done booting if you don't open task manager and see processor usage and opening task manager while windows is starting ...heheh... try it. You will get frustrated some more :-)
By
beegor, at 8:50 AM
"Watched my boss struggle with Vista, as it was pre-installed on his shiny new laptop. Had to laugh when he had to navigate through four (4) dialog boxes, just to create a folder in "C:\Program Files"."
Why on earth would anyone do that? That's like installing software manually on an Ubuntu box and not to /opt - it's fun for the beginning but the snowball starts rolling from there.
What he should have done is to deploy the MSI package properly via AD, or install it interactively by double clicking on it on the workstation. You boss was just plain stupid trying to do the wrong thing in the first place, using wrong tools and all.
By
Anonymous, at 1:16 PM
I'm currently fascinated every day by the machine I've set up at work, which uses a fresh, updated install of Windows XP on a pretty good machine (otherwise I only run Ubuntu) - every time I leave it for a while, it needs a lot of time to wake up again. And no, it doesn't enter sleep mode or anything, not even going to the login screen as XP sometimes does. But even if all I'm running is a browser or a music player, it apparently feels the need to put everything into swap or something as soon as it detects I'm idle.
Why on earth would the OS put an app into swap if there is no shortage of memory? Which, of course, there isn't, checked that.
By
Stoffe, at 11:18 PM
I often brag to a friend that I can have so many windows open that I can't tell what's in the task bar. He then comes back and say's that he can do that with his '87Gb' of RAM and dual core CPU. I then remind him that I have 1Gb of RAM and a 1.5G single core.
It's not only you ;-)
By
Anonymous, at 11:11 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home