Verily I say unto thee, that Doug Mentohl spake thusly:
> While I can manage to do more then one thing at a time, appariently
> the computer still hasn't managed to figure out how.
Multitasking was never Windows' strong suit. Just doing something as
innocuous as copying a file over the network, and listening to music at
the same time, is beyond Vista's capabilities.
One of the things that annoys me most, is how Windows will /apparently/
boot very quickly, but then the Desktop is almost completely
unresponsive for a good minute and a half to two minutes, while it
"catches up" (or should that be "caches up"?).
I discovered a little utility that staggers startup programs, so the
system isn't hammered every boot, and that does seem to alleviate the
problem somewhat, but the main culprits (antivirus, firewall, anti-
spyware, etc.) are unavoidable and necessary, and subsequently slow the
startup to a crawl.
Another weird phenomenon is how Wintel systems somehow seem to get
slower despite becoming more powerful. An AMD K6 450Mhz system running
Win98SE seemed faster and more responsive than my current P4 3.6GHz
system running XP Pro, despite the massive increase in clock speed, bus
speed, and memory. Newer != Better, it seems.
Of course your typical GNU/Linux distro has become more bloated over the
years too, but one can always use something like DSL, or even a source
based distro like Gentoo. I can see myself running Fedora 8 on that AMD
box, but somehow I really can't see me running Vista ... or even XP.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "[Microsoft] are willing to lose money for years and years just to
| make sure that you don't make any money, either." - Bob Cringely.
| - http://blog.businessofsoftware.org/2007/07/cringely-the-un.html
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
20:21:31 up 12 days, 17:57, 2 users, load average: 0.02, 0.09, 0.19
|
|
