Re: HI.......I WANT TO ASK ASK ABOUT UBUNTU PERFORMANCE

[monati]

HI

HOW ARE U

can i ask q

i have to research about ubuntu and vista
ok

after reseach i have nothing about performance

i want to know these things

availability , response time, capacity, latency, completion time, service time, bandwidth, throughput, relative efficiency, scalability, and speed up.

can u help me , please

thanks

[jafnob]

HI

HOW ARE U

can i ask q

i have to research about ubuntu and vista
ok

after reseach i have nothing about performance

i want to know these things

availability , response time, capacity, latency, completion time, service time, bandwidth, throughput, relative efficiency, scalability, and speed up.

can u help me , please

thanks

After what research? What have you come up with so far? Sound to me like you want someone else to do your research for you. Otherwise you could start ask specific questions and you will most certainly get specific answers. Thank you.

[Bungo Pony]

availability , response time, capacity, latency, completion time, service time, bandwidth, throughput, relative efficiency, scalability, and speed up.

With Ubuntu, all of those are really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really good.

There. You graduated with honors :)

[monati]

hi


After what research? What have you come up with so far? Sound to me like you want someone else to do your research for you. Otherwise you could start ask specific questions and you will most certainly get specific answers. Thank you.


hi jafnob

u understand me in wrong way . i do many research in google books , web site ,blog and nothing i want see is there, every say it is performance why i need to know why really

i dont need to know that his responce time is fast , i want to know why it is fast .

of course i do every thing in my researh from the introduction >> usabilty >>> ui >>>>>>> security>>> every thing i found but performance no ....... of course like what i want


why

i dont now


hi RoyalBlue

thanks so much

[the.dark.lord]

With Ubuntu, all of those are really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really good.

There. You graduated with honors :)

+1

With Vista, all of those are really, really, really, really....... [infinity] buggy.

[Lord Illidan]

Can you just make a civilized post in normal English?

[eentonig]

Can you try to stay away from all the layout. Apart from you bad english (which I don't blame you for. English isn't my native tongue either. But yours is very hard to understand), it makes your posts even harder to understand.

Can you please help us understand your question better?
Why do you need to investigate this? --> School? Work? Personal?
You want to measure the performance doing what? Both OS have their strenghts and weaknesses. It's hard to compare them as is. Give us specifics.

Performance for video-editing? Browsing? Startup-times? Uptime? Multi-user? ....

[monati]

Can you just make a civilized post in normal English?


hi Lord Illidan

i dont underatand u , my native language is not english

i am sorry if u cant understand what i write

with my pleasure monati

[g2g591]

vista on 2.4ghz processer and 512mb of ram with all visual effects turned off= very very very slow (about 5-7 minutes to boot and about 10 minutes to shutdown)

Ubuntu on the same machine with all visual effects on = about 1 and a half minutes to boot and about 2 minutes to shutdown.

[monati]

Can you try to stay away from all the layout. Apart from you bad english (which I don't blame you for. English isn't my native tongue either. But yours is very hard to understand), it makes your posts even harder to understand.

Can you please help us understand your question better?
Why do you need to investigate this? --> School? Work? Personal?
You want to measure the performance doing what? Both OS have their strenghts and weaknesses. It's hard to compare them as is. Give us specifics.

Performance for video-editing? Browsing? Startup-times? Uptime? Multi-user? ....

hi eentonig ,

for university. i had signed in the computer mind club in it
and i am person who say i will researh about unix and vista comparsion

my brother help me to chose one of unix edition and we chose
kubuntu

any thing , i am stupied in this thing >> and the researh make me more clever

i want to reasarh about os

thanks so much

i am sorry about bad english

[monati]

vista on 2.4ghz processer and 512mb of ram with all visual effects turned off= very very very slow (about 5-7 minutes to boot and about 10 minutes to shutdown)

Ubuntu on the same machine with all visual effects on = about 1 and a half minutes to boot and about 2 minutes to shutdown.


thanks so much

:)

[monati]

+1

With Vista, all of those are really, really, really, really....... [infinity] buggy.

thanks so much

[jafnob]

u understand me in wrong way . i do many research in google books , web site ,blog and nothing i want see is there, every say it is performance why i need to know why really

i dont need to know that his responce time is fast , i want to know why it is fast .


OK I was under the impression that you were looking for an easy way out on this one since you didn't even take time to formulate any questions at all except "can u help me" hoping that someone would type or link to an essay about Linux vs Windows performance. Maybe I misinterpreted your intentions.

However, in order for people to help you, can you please try to clarify what you want to know about performance by asking more specific questions? After all it's is a big subject.

[monati]

OK I was under the impression that you were looking for an easy way out on this one since you didn't even take time to formulate any questions at all except "can u help me" hoping that someone would type or link to an essay about Linux vs Windows performance. Maybe I misinterpreted your intentions.

However, in order for people to help you, can you please try to clarify what you want to know about performance by asking more specific questions? After all it's is a big subject.

hi

thanks so mush

i heard about this fourm that is very good . and all help other

but i just get >>>>>>.


ok , i really dont know anything about os
but i do my best to make my search complete

ok about performance i dont know i really dont know

thanks

i can help my self
and compare ubuntu and vista performance by self

but nobody will believe me because i am student and i must put reference

thanks


thanks

[nonewmsgs]

ideally you should dual boot the operating systems and use a variaty of benchmarks. hard data should trump any internet source.

[jafnob]

ideally you should dual boot the operating systems and use a variaty of benchmarks. hard data should trump any internet source.

What he said. Most internet sources are biased one way or the other anyway. One way to do it is you make your own tests and then come back and discuss your results on these boards. Then people will probably be more than happy to explain the performance differences related to those test results, with reference to relevant information. You could also use someone else's test etc. Bottom line is if you ask the right questions you'll get the right answers, simple as that.

[Anthem]

Timing the logins is a good start. People understand what that means, it's a good benchmark.

One I frequently use is "How long does it take to get into Firefox?" So how long does it take to start the computer, start the OS, start Firefox, and load www.google.com. That helps Ubuntu a bit because Windows doesn't fully load for a while... when you first get a usable desktop it's still burning resources trying to turn other things on. Once Linux is up, it's up.

I'd also time how long it takes to start some common applications... Firefox and OpenOffice are good, because they're cross-platform.

[dasunst3r]

I think what monati is looking for is benchmarks and other empirical measures for Ubuntu.

[WishingWell]

vista on 2.4ghz processer and 512mb of ram with all visual effects turned off= very very very slow (about 5-7 minutes to boot and about 10 minutes to shutdown)

Ubuntu on the same machine with all visual effects on = about 1 and a half minutes to boot and about 2 minutes to shutdown.

*sigh*

PEBKAC if Vista takes 5-7 minutes to boot for you, i've got an old Sempron 1.9Ghz with 512MB and an old Seagate drive and Vista boots in less than a minute while Ubuntu takes about 1-2 minutes.

Using the system after long periods of uptime makes Vista fly in comparison, it's not as stable though, mostly because of driver issues.

I still prefer using Linux since i can do things 10x as fast using the command line but performance in the gui? Vista wins, hands down.

[steveneddy]

Install it and find out for yourself.

[monati]

ok ,
hi

i need the thing in ubuntu made it better

like these in vista

SuperFetch

SuperFetch is a breakthrough in memory management
Optimizes based on usage patterns over time
Takes into account frequency of page usage, usage of page in context of other pages in memory
Adapts to memory usage patterns, including complex usage scenarios
Proactive and resilient
Smart about getting the right content into memory early and resilient to memory pressure
Efficient
Uses low priority I/O for pre-fetching and pre-population
SuperFetch manages RAM and cache memory



ReadyBoost

Non-volatile memory serves as a supplementary cache for SuperFetch
External USB keys, SD cards, Compact Flash, internal PCIe cards
Allows fast reads to satisfy page faults when page is not in main memory
Up to 10x faster than random HDD reads
Latency for USB Flash Drive ~0.8 mSec
Caches data proactively based on user activity


ReadyBoost Properties

Reliable
Write-through cache allows user to remove device at any time
No unique contents in the cache – always HDD-backed
Device wear is not an issue
Unique write gathering algorithm optimizes performance and wear patterns
Projected life of devices 19.4 – 1823 years depending on device size, variant, and usage patterns
Secure
Data is encrypted using AES 128bit crypto
Efficient
Data is compressed by a factor of 1.8X to 2.3X

ReadyDrive

Low-Priority I/O

Performance Tuning And Diagnostics

Lower the cost for diagnosing performance problems
Easier diagnosis and resolution of performance problems
Leverages data within the Circular Kernel Context Logger (CKCL)
Provides a record of recent system activity
Automated analysis applied for defined scenarios
Analysis results written to System Event Log


thing like this

thanks

are u know understand me

thanks so much

[julian67]

ok ,
hi

i need the thing in ubuntu made it better

like these in vista

SuperFetch

SuperFetch is a breakthrough in memory management
Optimizes based on usage patterns over time
Takes into account frequency of page usage, usage of page in context of other pages in memory
Adapts to memory usage patterns, including complex usage scenarios
Proactive and resilient
Smart about getting the right content into memory early and resilient to memory pressure
Efficient
Uses low priority I/O for pre-fetching and pre-population
SuperFetch manages RAM and cache memory



ReadyBoost

Non-volatile memory serves as a supplementary cache for SuperFetch
External USB keys, SD cards, Compact Flash, internal PCIe cards
Allows fast reads to satisfy page faults when page is not in main memory
Up to 10x faster than random HDD reads
Latency for USB Flash Drive ~0.8 mSec
Caches data proactively based on user activity


ReadyBoost Properties

Reliable
Write-through cache allows user to remove device at any time
No unique contents in the cache – always HDD-backed
Device wear is not an issue
Unique write gathering algorithm optimizes performance and wear patterns
Projected life of devices 19.4 – 1823 years depending on device size, variant, and usage patterns
Secure
Data is encrypted using AES 128bit crypto
Efficient
Data is compressed by a factor of 1.8X to 2.3X

ReadyDrive

Low-Priority I/O

Performance Tuning And Diagnostics

Lower the cost for diagnosing performance problems
Easier diagnosis and resolution of performance problems
Leverages data within the Circular Kernel Context Logger (CKCL)
Provides a record of recent system activity
Automated analysis applied for defined scenarios
Analysis results written to System Event Log


thing like this

thanks

are u know understand me

thanks so much

That stuff is only silly marketing. All these features are found in other operating systems such as Ubuntu. If you start believing Microsoft marketing machine you are in trouble. Perhaps you need to make practical comparisons because it's unlikely you are going to make a good empirical analysis of the Linux and Vista kernels and associated tools with zero knowledge as your base.

[WishingWell]

That stuff is only silly marketing. All these features are found in other operating systems such as Ubuntu. If you start believing Microsoft marketing machine you are in trouble. Perhaps you need to make practical comparisons because it's unlikely you are going to make a good empirical analysis of the Linux and Vista kernels and associated tools with zero knowledge as your base.

Actually, most of those features are NOT found in any other OS than Vista and it's good features.

But perhaps you would like to take the time to explain to me how Ubuntu implements such things as superfetch and readyboost?

Linux has a hundred different things that are most definently great features, such as an SW RAID that is faster than most (pretty much all) HW RAID solutions, a more robust way to deal with drivers (when there are drivers that are not third party drivers) and a development model that is excellent.

There is no need to try to trumph Vista on Vistas merits or to make uninformed statements like "Ubuntu has those features" when that simply is not true.

I believe that Linux will steal some of the features such as readyboost and superfetch from Vista and since they are great features, i see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[Nekiruhs]

Actually, most of those features are NOT found in any other OS than Vista and it's good features.

But perhaps you would like to take the time to explain to me how Ubuntu implements such things as superfetch and readyboost?

Linux has a hundred different things that are most definently great features, such as an SW RAID that is faster than most (pretty much all) HW RAID solutions, a more robust way to deal with drivers (when there are drivers that are not third party drivers) and a development model that is excellent.

There is no need to try to trumph Vista on Vistas merits or to make uninformed statements like "Ubuntu has those features" when that simply is not true.

I believe that Linux will steal some of the features such as readyboost and superfetch from Vista and since they are great features, i see absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Ready boost can be done by plugging in your flash drive, and using it as swap. preload package does the same as superfetch.

[WishingWell]

Ready boost can be done by plugging in your flash drive, and using it as swap. Prefetch package does the same as superfetch.

Readyboost is very different from having your page file or swap partition on a flash drive and prefetch does not compare to Superfetch at all.

i know it's all the rage on this forum to put down Vista but these are functions that are very beneficial for many people.

Utilizing Readyboost and Superfetch you have availability to the programs you use the most very fast, it doesn't simply cache just anything, it actually caches the files you use even before you start using them, it learns which programs to keep in memory and which to page out and it requires no user intervention what so ever.

It's good functions and it's exclusive to Vista right now, i'm sure that won't last very long though.

[PrimoTurbo]

Best way to test anything is to do it on various systems, find a way to benchmark cross-platform or you might even have to write your own program to do it accurately.

[tehkain]

Flash drives cannot be used as RAM for any real amount of time so that feature is not being implemented by default(there are many ways to achieve it on linux) in the kernel. Write limits on flash drives makes the feature moot. It is not like a harddrive where file are static and writes per minute are very small. You could accumulate the 200 000 write limit in a few hours of operation. Those marketing numbers are way off and it goes against all the facts. If they only use the drive to the point where 'Device wear is not an issue' the files cached on the flash stick would be just as useful in swap. It would have to only house data that changes once in a blue moon and only needs to be accessed rarely. Thus negating the reasons for using it.

[WishingWell]

Best way to test anything is to do it on various systems, find a way to benchmark cross-platform or you might even have to write your own program to do it accurately.

Best way is to use it and time it, that way you'll get a real world figure and not some synthetic benchmark figure.

It also depends on what you're trying to do, as a server Linux has a lot of advantages that you won't find in any version of Windows, as a desktop Vista has some advantages over Ubuntu once the indexing and learning which files to keep cached and which functions you never use so they can be paged out while Linux has a much smaller memory footprint in comparison.

And last but not least, it comes down to what hardware you have, drivers in Vista suck at the moment and some hardware doesn't work at all so if your computer wasn't purchased with parts selected to work with Vista then it might not be a great choice, OTOH, the same goes for Ubuntu, but to a lesser extent, in that case XP is a good choice since pretty much everything works in XP these days.

[WishingWell]

Flash drives cannot be used as RAM for any real amount of time so that feature is not being implemented by default(there are many ways to achieve it on linux) in the kernel. Write limits on flash drives makes the feature moot. It is not like a harddrive where file are static and writes per minute are very small. You could accumulate the 200 000 write limit in a few hours of operation. Those marketing numbers are way off and it goes against all the facts. If they only use the drive to the point where 'Device wear is not an issue' the files cached on the flash stick would be just as useful in swap. It would have to only house data that changes once in a blue moon and only needs to be accessed rarely. Thus negating the reasons for using it.

Well this is simply a misunderstanding of how Readyboost works and how robust flash memory is today, none of what you have said is true.

Readyboost is NOT a pagefile on a flash drive and it is NOT meant to be a substitute for RAM, in fact, it has nothing to do with RAM at all, it's supposed to work as a cache for commonly used files and it works because even though transfer rates aren't all that great, seek times are much much lower than on a HDD and since the users profile for used programs doesn't change much there won't be a lot of writes but a lot of reads instead.

[tehkain]

Well this is simply a misunderstanding of how Readyboost works and how robust flash memory is today, none of what you have said is true.

Readyboost is NOT a pagefile on a flash drive and it is NOT meant to be a substitute for RAM, in fact, it has nothing to do with RAM at all, it's supposed to work as a cache for commonly used files and it works because even though transfer rates aren't all that great, seek times are much much lower than on a HDD and since the users profile for used programs doesn't change much there won't be a lot of writes but a lot of reads instead.

Write limits still hover around 300 000 for decent quality drives. So yes.

[julian67]

Actually, most of those features are NOT found in any other OS than Vista and it's good features.

But perhaps you would like to take the time to explain to me how Ubuntu implements such things as superfetch and readyboost?

Linux has a hundred different things that are most definently great features, such as an SW RAID that is faster than most (pretty much all) HW RAID solutions, a more robust way to deal with drivers (when there are drivers that are not third party drivers) and a development model that is excellent.

There is no need to try to trumph Vista on Vistas merits or to make uninformed statements like "Ubuntu has those features" when that simply is not true.

I believe that Linux will steal some of the features such as readyboost and superfetch from Vista and since they are great features, i see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Search/Google these forums and you'll find both readyboost and prefetch linking are easily implemented on Ubuntu/anylinuxdistro. It's not a matter of trumping anyone or anything, just simple facts and I see nothing wrong with that ;-)

[g2g591]

acording to pcworld magizine, readyboost only increases program launch time by 6% at the best, so its not that big of a deal (at least to me)

[monati]

thanks so much

i love your comment

it is really benifit

thanks so much

[julian67]

So if ReadyBoost and SuperFetch are so so Ready and Super....why does Vista require 3 or 4 times as much RAM and much faster CPU to perform same task as Linux or even XP? mmmm love that DRM :lolflag:

[gruffy-06]

If I wanted faster speed on Ubuntu, I just install the preload package from Universe. It is the GNU/Linux equivalent of Superfetch in Vista and has been available since 2005.