Two ways Microsoft sabotages Linux desktop adoption

[Mike McCarty]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 17:10, Mike McCarty wrote:
> 
> 

>>I don't really think that this is the problem. I think
>>it's due to memory swap, cache, and flushing memory
>>to virtual.
> 
> 
> That's a side effect not a cause.  The kernel doesn't
> use much memory.  KDE or Gnome do. Cron uses some,
> sendmail uses some, named uses some, xinetd uses some.
> All for very good reasons, but if you need them you
> should provide real RAM and if you don't you should
> turn them off.  The kernel won't flush active memory
> to virtual unless it is needed for something else.

Yes, like Thunderbird and Mozilla.

>>I use Word about 3 times per year. I don't think it's hanging
>>around in cache on the server.
> 
> 
> Word installs a ton of stuff locally and starts it at boot
> even if you think you are loading it from a network drive.

But it's not installed on that machine. It's on a server running
NT. All that exists on the W95 machine is a "shortcut" on the
desktop. I've heard the disc on the server crank up when I click
on that link.

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!