Slashdot Mirror
The ~200 Line Linux Kernel Patch That Does Wonders
An anonymous reader writes "There is a relatively miniscule patch to the Linux kernel scheduler being queued up for Linux 2.6.38 that is proving to have dramatic results for those multi-tasking on the desktop. Phoronix is reporting the ~200 line Linux kernel patch that does wonders with before and after videos demonstrating the much-improved responsiveness and interactivity of the Linux desktop. While compiling the Linux kernel with 64 parallel jobs, 1080p video playback was still smooth, windows could be moved fluidly, and there was not nearly as much of a slowdown compared to when this patch was applied. Linus Torvalds has shared his thoughts on this patch: So I think this is firmly one of those 'real improvement' patches. Good job. Group scheduling goes from 'useful for some specific server loads' to 'that's a killer feature.'"
Community firmware on devices with a digitally signed kernel or with oddball hardware for which the community can't figure out how to write a driver: Never.
Community firmware and Google apps (including Market) on the same device: Cease and desist.
Community firmware on devices sold in United States retail stores without a bundled $70/mo phone plan: Give me a break.
Isn't it awesome when a new version of your OS performs *better* than the last one on the same hardware?
Yeah, like how Windows 7 is better than Vista on the same hardware? Or how most versions of OS X since 10.0 have ended up being slightly faster than the previous version on the same hardware?
Oh wait, were you and your "Insightful" moderators trying to say that Linux is the only operating system that has the ability to improve over time? Sorry. Don't mind me. Back to your regularly scheduled zealotry.
Seriously. Steve Jobs apparently does not have a monopoly on the Reality Distortion Field. Be supportive of Linux by all means, but please do so with with valid reasoning.
Arch Linux: Already in core.
Great!
Now those 8 users will be happy.
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Linux fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Linux box (a PIII 800 w/512 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Linux box, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this file transfer, Mozilla will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Emacs Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Linux machines, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Linux box that has run faster than its Windows counterpart, despite the Linux machines faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 800 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that Linux is a "superior" machine.
Linux addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Linux over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.
I guess the lesson is: if you want to get a change made, don't be a whiny dick about it and throw your toys out of the pram when you don't get your own way on the first attempt. Bless.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.