Linux users want better desktop performance (Screw data. Prioritize code)

[Roy Bynum]

Valent Turkovic wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Valent Turkovic
> <valent.turkovic at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> http://rudd-o.com/en/linux-and-free-software/tales-from-responsivenessland-why-linux-feels-slow-and-how-to-fix-that
>>
>> What is you comment?
>>
>> --
>> http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
>> linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
>> registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
>> ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
>>
>>     
>
> As a long time Linux desktop user and Linux enthusiast I want bloody
> screaming fast desktop :) There are some situations that I just want
> to pull my hair out when I see that desktop performance just crawls to
> a halt :(
>
> When I read articles like Tales from responsivenessland[1] I really
> don't get why there aren't bells ringing in the heads of the people
> who can actually make a difference for Linux desktop performance.
>
> I was also really sad when I read interview with Con Kolivas[2] and
> the reasons why he quit kernel development[3].
>
> I hope kernel developers will wake up and realise that there are also
> us - Desktop users and what we need and want are responsive desktops.
>
> Will Fedora be the first Linux distro to have sane desktop defaults
> (vm.swappiness=1 and vm.vfs_cache_pressure=50). Current Fedora slogan
> is "Features. Freedom. Friends. First", I hope to see "Desktop
> performance" as part of it soon ;)
>
> [1] http://rudd-o.com/en/linux-and-free-software/tales-from-responsivenessland-why-linux-feels-slow-and-how-to-fix-that
> [2] http://apcmag.com/interview_with_con_kolivas_part_1_computing_is_boring.htm
> [3] http://apcmag.com/why_i_quit_kernel_developer_con_kolivas.htm
>
>   
Valent may have partially pointed to the issue of performance vs. 
features.  As Microsoft users have discovered, the more active processes 
that are running and the pipes that interactive data, such as email and 
internet, go through, the slower a system will run.  Newer, more complex 
(read: amount of code required to be functional) applications and 
updates are applied, the perceived performance continues to degrade. The 
amount of load on a desktop system has expanded at a staggering rate.  
Virtualization adds its own load to active desktops as well.  And 
because of additional security monitoring processes, older hardware 
should not be pushed to perform at the level that it has in the past.

New hardware technology such as higher speed, multi-core processor and 2 
and 3 channel memory is becoming more common, which tends to be better 
able to handle the expanded processing  and I/O load.  This does nothing 
for the majority of Linux users that are used to being able to use older 
hardware, yet want the features of the newer applications and functions.

Desktop performance comes down to a trade off between the perceived 
performance and number of active features/processes with the amount of 
code to be executed,  based on a common hardware performance.   A 
proposed "auto-tunning" I/O manager may provide some assistance, but it 
also adds an processing load on the desktop. 

Has anyone done any benchmarking on the amount of code, granularity of 
the code, and processing performance?  Has anyone done any benchmarking 
of applications and versions that may give some insight on the code 
processing vs hardware performance issues?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/attachments/20090220/5ce26919/attachment.htm>