Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 4th Sep 2008 21:33 UTC
Windows A few weeks ago, I reviewed the Acer Aspire One notebook, the variant which came with an Acer-modified version of Linpus Linux. This version was locked-down and difficult to modify, so not too long after I installed Ubuntu, and was reasonably pleased - despite the amount of tweaking it took to get it working. A few days ago, however, I realised Linux wouldn't be ideal for me on my netbook. Due to pragmatic reasons, I'm now running Windows XP.
Thread beginning with comment 329338
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: FAT, it's all about FAT
by lemur2 on Fri 5th Sep 2008 09:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: FAT, it's all about FAT"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Yup, I used ext2.


Ext2 is indeed not a journaling filesystem, but it is getting quite venerable now and it has the worst performance of filesystems that you could choose for Linux.

http://librenix.com/?inode=922
http://lists.mysql.com/benchmarks/133

Agreed that you wouldn't want to use a journalling filesystem for a SSD ...

... so why didn't you try a Linux filesystem that was actually designed for use with SSDs?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JFFS2
http://sourceware.org/jffs2/

http://logfs.org/logfs/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YAFFS

There are at least these three. In fact, there is a quite a selection:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_file_systems#Flash_memory_.2F_...

Note that FAT32 is not one of them. FAT or exFAT (FAT64) ... maybe. However, given the lack of attributes that any MS FAT filesystem can support, FAT filesystems are not recommended for Linux use.

Firefox/Linux is slower than Firefox/Windows


Utter rubbish. Twaddle. Bunk.

Why would you even say such a thing?

Edited 2008-09-05 09:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: FAT, it's all about FAT
by J. M. on Sat 6th Sep 2008 16:56 in reply to "RE[4]: FAT, it's all about FAT"
J. M. Member since:
2005-07-24

"Firefox/Linux is slower than Firefox/Windows


Utter rubbish. Twaddle. Bunk.

Why would you even say such a thing?
"
Because it's true? I've been using Linux for many years, I've seen thousands of comments from Linux users about Firefox, but not one of them, not even the most enthusiastic Linux fanboy would ever say Firefox on Linux is at least distantly comparable in speed to Firefox on Windows. The difference is so screamingly obvious - the Firefox user interface is supersluggish on Linux. But that's not specific to Firefox, this generally applies to any other program (those multiplatform GUI apps always run an order of magnitude faster on Windows, when it comes to GUI speed).

Reply Parent Score: 2