I think the problem there is more due to your IT mismanagement. I lose about 10 mins a month due to patches. Maybe another minute or two due to the network security software starting up, allowing me to access our network.
Even with EVERYONE in this situation, we'd still lose much more time to restroom or cigarette breaks (and in the later case, most people here don't even smoke).
Actually, faster than hibernate, slower than sleep/wake (without the power trickle requirements). Unlike either, you don't keep a lot of application states. Faster than a standard start from shut down.
For people that don't hibernate/sleep their systems, it will probably be nice.
Some people don't care if they are tracked or not, most probably don't.
But, more importantly, how many people honestly think that these companies are not following 'do not track' rules because of incompetence or inability? They are not following them because they don't want to. This release by Mozilla is funny. It is akin to (while being mugged), telling the person mugging you, "mugging is wrong, you can also make money by getting a job!" If you thing that's going to work, you're an idiot.
Here's a better solution. Find companies that violate these rules. Set up something that blacklists their DNS entries, and either add that to DNS, or add a secondary tool that you can put on your computer, that will also query that list when making DNS requests.
I'm running SC2 on Ubuntu with an NVidia card with all the settings max'd out and it runs just as fast as on windows. There are known issues with the ATI drivers under Linux and SC2. Actually the ATI drivers are not the greatest on any platform to begin with.
I've tried with a 7300(SE?) in FreeBSD6.x, 8600(GT[x]?) in 7.x and 470GTX in 8.x and some integrated thing for a Phenom II in bot 7.x and 8.x - the drivers have work splendidly even on high resoultions. I was running wow on the 7300 in a 1280x1024 window on a 1080p screen, maxed out with the rendering distance increased in the config.wtf increased to about 1.5x the max I could set it in the GUI. outside of Dalaran, it gave me 40FPS or better.
FreeBSD has no troubles with nvidia cards, as far as I can tell.
That was in response to asking if he should try FreeBSD. Unless you are using a 9800 or lower, an ATI card probably won't work well. You might pass woth an X1k or an X2k, but I'm not so sure on that. Anything from the X lines and up is going to be better under Linux.
yeah, and then they'll learn about hacking wireless, and extend it to all computers in the neighborhood.
Then you'll have your computer taken because little Timmy down the street was streaming the Brittany's latest trash-pop hit "skankin it down", or some other media that should probably require legal action against the producer...
Comparisons: CPU: Same Mobo: Linux: MSI, BSD: (ASUS?) - In my experience MSI is slightly faster and a bit less stable Memory: Linux: 4GB, BSD: 3.2GB HDD: Doesn't say the brand for BSD, but the size appears right for a 2^10th united 250GB drive. Seagates aren't known for their speed though. GPU: Same Audio/Network: Different, probably wouldn't provide more than a small variance Desktop Manager: Linux: Unity, BSD: KDE4 - Neither is resource friend, so I can't make a call on this. X: Linux's is newer, speed improvements or feature bloat? Driver: Same. GCC: Linux is newer so will probably optimise better, or be about the same. But these are probably the system defaults, so I have trouble saying this is inappropriate. FileSystem: BSD has zfs, which I believe is faster than ext4, but I'm not sure on this. Is this the native for PCBSD? FreeBSD, to my knowledge still defaults to UFS2
"unfair" advantages for Linux: More memory, possibly a faster mobo. "unfair" advantage to PCBSD: possibly the use of zfs, it depends on if it is the default for PCBSD. PCBSD might have something faster than a slowgate. Wildcards: Unity vs. KDE4, X versions, audio, network.
Yes, I guess my bigger point was, that there are a lot of things that could affect that particular benchmark, and make one option faster without being better, even if, ostensibly, all controllable variables are normalized between the two systems.
Actually, the graphics support is really good, but in my example, WoW has a *lot* more graphical features turned on in DirectX than OpenGL, so it would run faster in Linux or FreeBSD because it was using OpenGL (you had to run it in OGL mode in wine).
I don't think that is the issue in this test, because the FreeBSD nVidia driver is very close to the Linux nVidia driver. However, I cannot discount it as a possibility either.
No, I wasn't saying it was a feature, I was saying that this test is meaningless. In the context of statements like this
As a FreeBSD user, I can't necessarily agree with you.
or this
Now, if this were various server/desktop non-multimedia applications, I might start to find the article relevant.
There is something similar to that in FreeBSD also, I believe.
And if you expect that to work reliably for a large number of drivers, I have a bridge between two mountains in Kansas, with a nice ocean view, that I'd love to sell you, cheap!
That being said, outside of the latest soundcards (occasionally), ATI graphics cards, and video cameras and wireless, the driver support isn't too bad. The wireless driver support may be ok, I've just never managed to figure out how to set it up...
But the GP was suggesting this was making it big and slow. It can increase the disk space (not like OOOrg or KDE, for example, though), but I cannot see adding hardware compatibility would slow the OS down like he was suggesting (consider the context of what he was responding to).
Different sized HDD can have a bit of an effect (larger does tend to have higher throughput). Motherboards can also have a decent effect depending on how they are tweaked by the manufacturer. The file system is irrelevant because availability general varies between OSes, for each, pick either the standard or the fastest available, that the OS can support, rather than focusing on the same.
Addendum, in fact, one of the reasons they took so long to get it out on AMD64/FreeBSD is because they wanted FreeBSD to support some memory mapping functions that were in Linux, to make porting it easier.
Actually, from what I've read, the closed source NV driver for FreeBSD (and hence, PCBSD) is not much modified from the Linux driver, just a few modifications to the kernel interface to make it work.
Which is nice, if you are used to reading sites where the conclusion didn't match the benchmarks (I noticed this with Toms Hardware a few years ago, before I stopped reading them, dunno if this has been remedied).
That's just it, adding hardware compatibility will increase disk space, but unless it's poorly done, that's about it. I seriously doubt Linux loads every driver installed, regardless of need.
I think the bigger issue is the interfaces/etc. Unless I am mistaken, Linux has a less stable (as in it change more, not crashes) API than FreeBSD. Having to adapt to this, multiple times, could ad to kludgy patch jobs in applications, making them run less and less efficiently. It may not be the Linux kernel or drivers that are the problem, bur rather, all the Linux applications that are running, and competing for resources.
As a FreeBSD user, I can't necessarily agree with you.
WoW also performs better on FreeBSD/Wine than it does on Windows. The issue here, is the graphics capabilities. If it asks less of the graphics card, it will still run, but run faster. In the case of WoW, it's not trying to do nearly all the fancy GPU stuff that windows would do, so it is faster.
Now, if this were various server/desktop non-multimedia applications, I might start to find the article relevant.
Slashdot Mirror
It is irrelevant to the hibernate/sleep users, because those processes are almost completely hardware bottlenecked dependent.
So, what you are saying, is it sucks for people who are dealing with hardware bottlenecked options, that the software won't fix it???
You should be looking for someone other than an OS vendor to fix that issue.
I think the problem there is more due to your IT mismanagement. I lose about 10 mins a month due to patches. Maybe another minute or two due to the network security software starting up, allowing me to access our network.
Even with EVERYONE in this situation, we'd still lose much more time to restroom or cigarette breaks (and in the later case, most people here don't even smoke).
Actually, faster than hibernate, slower than sleep/wake (without the power trickle requirements). Unlike either, you don't keep a lot of application states.
Faster than a standard start from shut down.
For people that don't hibernate/sleep their systems, it will probably be nice.
You mean, that wasn't obvious before?
Some people don't care if they are tracked or not, most probably don't.
But, more importantly, how many people honestly think that these companies are not following 'do not track' rules because of incompetence or inability? They are not following them because they don't want to. This release by Mozilla is funny. It is akin to (while being mugged), telling the person mugging you, "mugging is wrong, you can also make money by getting a job!" If you thing that's going to work, you're an idiot.
Here's a better solution. Find companies that violate these rules. Set up something that blacklists their DNS entries, and either add that to DNS, or add a secondary tool that you can put on your computer, that will also query that list when making DNS requests.
FTFY
I've tried with a 7300(SE?) in FreeBSD6.x, 8600(GT[x]?) in 7.x and 470GTX in 8.x and some integrated thing for a Phenom II in bot 7.x and 8.x - the drivers have work splendidly even on high resoultions. I was running wow on the 7300 in a 1280x1024 window on a 1080p screen, maxed out with the rendering distance increased in the config.wtf increased to about 1.5x the max I could set it in the GUI. outside of Dalaran, it gave me 40FPS or better.
FreeBSD has no troubles with nvidia cards, as far as I can tell.
That was in response to asking if he should try FreeBSD. Unless you are using a 9800 or lower, an ATI card probably won't work well. You might pass woth an X1k or an X2k, but I'm not so sure on that. Anything from the X lines and up is going to be better under Linux.
I've been doing all my P2P'ing in those places already. No point in having it traced back to my network.
yeah, and then they'll learn about hacking wireless, and extend it to all computers in the neighborhood.
Then you'll have your computer taken because little Timmy down the street was streaming the Brittany's latest trash-pop hit "skankin it down", or some other media that should probably require legal action against the producer...
No. You have an ATI card. 3D ATI drivers for anything less than 4 years old are non existent, and barely work for the older stuff.
Actually reading TFA
Comparisons:
CPU: Same
Mobo: Linux: MSI, BSD: (ASUS?) - In my experience MSI is slightly faster and a bit less stable
Memory: Linux: 4GB, BSD: 3.2GB
HDD: Doesn't say the brand for BSD, but the size appears right for a 2^10th united 250GB drive. Seagates aren't known for their speed though.
GPU: Same
Audio/Network: Different, probably wouldn't provide more than a small variance
Desktop Manager: Linux: Unity, BSD: KDE4 - Neither is resource friend, so I can't make a call on this.
X: Linux's is newer, speed improvements or feature bloat?
Driver: Same.
GCC: Linux is newer so will probably optimise better, or be about the same. But these are probably the system defaults, so I have trouble saying this is inappropriate.
FileSystem: BSD has zfs, which I believe is faster than ext4, but I'm not sure on this. Is this the native for PCBSD? FreeBSD, to my knowledge still defaults to UFS2
"unfair" advantages for Linux: More memory, possibly a faster mobo.
"unfair" advantage to PCBSD: possibly the use of zfs, it depends on if it is the default for PCBSD. PCBSD might have something faster than a slowgate.
Wildcards: Unity vs. KDE4, X versions, audio, network.
Yes, I guess my bigger point was, that there are a lot of things that could affect that particular benchmark, and make one option faster without being better, even if, ostensibly, all controllable variables are normalized between the two systems.
Actually, the graphics support is really good, but in my example, WoW has a *lot* more graphical features turned on in DirectX than OpenGL, so it would run faster in Linux or FreeBSD because it was using OpenGL (you had to run it in OGL mode in wine).
I don't think that is the issue in this test, because the FreeBSD nVidia driver is very close to the Linux nVidia driver. However, I cannot discount it as a possibility either.
No, I wasn't saying it was a feature, I was saying that this test is meaningless.
In the context of statements like this
or this
That should have been very obvious.
There is something similar to that in FreeBSD also, I believe.
And if you expect that to work reliably for a large number of drivers, I have a bridge between two mountains in Kansas, with a nice ocean view, that I'd love to sell you, cheap!
That being said, outside of the latest soundcards (occasionally), ATI graphics cards, and video cameras and wireless, the driver support isn't too bad. The wireless driver support may be ok, I've just never managed to figure out how to set it up...
But the GP was suggesting this was making it big and slow. It can increase the disk space (not like OOOrg or KDE, for example, though), but I cannot see adding hardware compatibility would slow the OS down like he was suggesting (consider the context of what he was responding to).
Different sized HDD can have a bit of an effect (larger does tend to have higher throughput). Motherboards can also have a decent effect depending on how they are tweaked by the manufacturer. The file system is irrelevant because availability general varies between OSes, for each, pick either the standard or the fastest available, that the OS can support, rather than focusing on the same.
Addendum, in fact, one of the reasons they took so long to get it out on AMD64/FreeBSD is because they wanted FreeBSD to support some memory mapping functions that were in Linux, to make porting it easier.
Actually, from what I've read, the closed source NV driver for FreeBSD (and hence, PCBSD) is not much modified from the Linux driver, just a few modifications to the kernel interface to make it work.
Which is nice, if you are used to reading sites where the conclusion didn't match the benchmarks (I noticed this with Toms Hardware a few years ago, before I stopped reading them, dunno if this has been remedied).
That's just it, adding hardware compatibility will increase disk space, but unless it's poorly done, that's about it. I seriously doubt Linux loads every driver installed, regardless of need.
I think the bigger issue is the interfaces/etc. Unless I am mistaken, Linux has a less stable (as in it change more, not crashes) API than FreeBSD. Having to adapt to this, multiple times, could ad to kludgy patch jobs in applications, making them run less and less efficiently. It may not be the Linux kernel or drivers that are the problem, bur rather, all the Linux applications that are running, and competing for resources.
As a FreeBSD user, I can't necessarily agree with you.
WoW also performs better on FreeBSD/Wine than it does on Windows. The issue here, is the graphics capabilities. If it asks less of the graphics card, it will still run, but run faster. In the case of WoW, it's not trying to do nearly all the fancy GPU stuff that windows would do, so it is faster.
Now, if this were various server/desktop non-multimedia applications, I might start to find the article relevant.
With the age they are now? I think it is probably easier on the eyes this way. Anything with 2-foot or better resolution could be quite unpleasant.
No, self Immolation would be NASA at this point...
I'll patent virtual love, and the billions of left/right-hands of prior art wont stop the patent office from granting me the patent.