Ed Greshko wrote:
> I wrote
Why should Linux be using more CPU than Windows?
I don't know that it does or doesn't. But the question is to vague to even
contemplate. Maybe in a multi-tasking environment Linux is more efficient
You apparently already know all the answers. Of course you don't need
more data.
in its scheduling. Maybe a Linux system spends less time in an idle/wait
state while I/O is going on. What services/tasks are being performed on
when running windows v.s. Linux?
All I know is, there isn't some hidden defect in "Linux" causing every
Who said anything about "hidden defect"?
Every defect has a first time that it gets discovered. As software
gradually matures, the "easy" defects get taken care of, and the
more elusive ones remain.
system running it to use more electricity and over heating systems. Then
again, maybe Linux is conspiracy cooked up by the oil companies to increase
demand for their products. :-)
This isn't worth responding to. The whole message has the appearance
of a joke.
I suggest that he actually capture some information, and the world
comes to pieces. Where I come from letting prejudice guide behavior
is not considered good practice.
I suggest he run top or something similar, and actually *measure*
CPU utilization. If it is within normal operation (as I suspect
it is) then that's the end of the story.
If it isn't, then it's worth further investigation.
Suggesting actually *collecting information* rather than
*acting on knee-jerk prejudice* is usually considered
prudent, where I come from.
But then, I come from a background where if software
fails, one loses customers, because they don't have
a religious attachment to using it, and people care
about their reputations, and try to produce high
quality stuff, because they know the customers will
vote with their feet.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
