On Friday 19 May 2006 21:40, Adam Bower wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 08:51:22PM +0100, Paul Tansom wrote:
I think they're being more than a little optimistic there aren't they (actually aren't they always?). I have Windows XP running on a 1.2GHz processor with 512MB memory and it runs like a dog - even though it is a very recent installation. Maybe I'm just too used to the performance of my Linux box, but waiting for 10-15 seconds while it gets itself sorted out so I can log on and pausing whilst switching between windows doesn't feel like blistering performance to me.
I dislike Windows XP as much as the next Linux geek but that doesn't sound right. On my desktop Windows XP certainly isn't as snappy as Linux+Gnome but it's not slow, and given that I've been using a 1.2Ghz machine with 512 Megs ram with XP recently and it wasn't bad at all I'm wondering if you havn't got the correct chipset drivers installed or something similar as that seems a very common way to make Windows run /very/ slowly.
Yes, there's no need to present any strange perceptions on this one - I've run windows XP on a 233mhz pentium machine with 256Mb of ram.
Of course, you could probably find animated 640x480 gifs that would be more useful than windows, but that fisher-price desktop sat there eating RAM and offering sparse functionality, which to be fair is what you're paying Microsoft for.
Huzzah,
Ten
--- There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary, and those who don't.