No announcement yet.

SphinUX OS Claims To Be ~150% Faster Than GNU/Linux

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by kraftman View Post
    You were saying Amarok is slower than Banshee or uses more memory, but I showed you it was a different. Tomboy - a simple note taking application - was heavier than Firefox and it was also showed to you. SharpDevelop or Visual Studio could offer less features and that's why they were more lightweight. It's unprovable if you were criticizing Qt unfairly or fairly, but it was shown to you Qt applications are usually lighter and more responsive.

    You were trying to convince us java is worse than MS MONO.
    Do we read the same messages?

    I said: AmaroK starts slower than Banshee (and this was shown!). Is it different from the statement of Banshee being faster (faster in playing a 3 minutes song? Will it play it in 2 minutes 30 seconds!?). It use (at least at the time) less memory.

    So, it is not unfair, this part, right?

    Did I defend Tomboy for memory usage? Or did I defend it as it was an useful application (for people that were not memory conscious), right?

    I think exactly in the post, the center part is the most important (because it shows the context of the topic, plus my views) :
    This is here, 2 answers earlier of what was told by you:
    Also, I've wrote things that disagree with Miguel on his page, so taking this into perspective is equal like an alter-ego of Miguel enters on his page to criticize him?!
    At the end, my messages were about reasonable thinking, not biases. I honestly don't like KDE look, but I do think that is an amazing piece of software, so I don't write crap about KDE. Also, I don't attack Nokia for its contributions to Qt or KDE (yes Nokia pay developers for KDE project), and I do think that a lot of technologies to Linux bring more choice than fewer. Why you don't attack the opensourceness of Qt that have also a comercial license? Why don't attack LLVM/CLang that "sneak" into a lot of opensource projects?
    It looks to me, that what I asked all around the topic was: "I personally found Mono useful, and the FUD that was told about Mono is as equal for Qt/Nokia, or Apple/Clang, wasn't it?" Also, some claims (like the startup time), I tested them and I found them lacking (because people think to Mono as "enterprisey", so all Mono applications are by definition slow), I rembember the Amarok + QtCreator was like 21 seconds, when Banshee and MonoDevelop was like 14-15 seconds.

    If you try to see that Java is worse than Mono, please read again, I said: C#/Mono is slower (in raw performance numbers), but is better integrated with desktop (If you know JNI, and you compare with PInvoke, you know what I'm talking about). Also as of the time of writing, can you name some Gnome applications written in Java? Azureus (even is not a Gnome application)!? Eclipse (!?) Really, I don't know any! At least on Gnome at that time was at least a bit different (thanks to Novell): Gnome Do, F-Spot, Banshee, Beagle, Tomboy, MonoDevelop were targetting Gnome/Gtk# by default, not WinForms. Do you know any Java integration to write Gnome applications? Maybe can you point to me to a tutorial how to set Java with Gtk?
    Last edited by ciplogic; 06-11-2013, 11:39 AM.


    • Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
      I'll just put it out there that you can run Linux on 4 MB RAM and a floppy disk. That kernel will be stripped to hell, and you get basics only, but it runs and will do its work.
      By now you need a 2+MB kernel. I know this because I've tried...I wonder what BFS does to kernel size/mem use.
      But 4 MB RAM is still correct. boot with mem=4096


      • Originally posted by Ibidem View Post
        By now you need a 2+MB kernel. I know this because I've tried...I wonder what BFS does to kernel size/mem use.
        But 4 MB RAM is still correct. boot with mem=4096
        Why would a scheduler change affect that in any noticeable way?


        • Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
          Why would a scheduler change affect that in any noticeable way?
          Originally posted by Con Kolivas
          As it is, if you remove the CGROUPS code as well as CFS that BFS replaces in the mainline linux kernel, you'd end up with almost 20,000 lines less code.




            • I'm the best according to myself, too.


              • SphinUXOS, all of that and not a single objective number. Pure marketing fluff, why did you think we'd be interested in it?


                • Nice try... no wait, no it wasn't. At the very least you could have fabricated some actual performance numbers or something instead of just asserting BS claims into an spread sheet.


                  • It costs more than Windows, uses more power and generates more heat. Interesting.


                    • Who is the author of that? This pretends to be from someone not involved with SphinUX but in many places it seems the author has no clue and just makes stuff up vaguely related to what you would find with a very superficial google search.

                      GNU/Linux has a bad
                      reputation of power
                      consumption and thermal
                      noise, most Linux
                      distributions addressed
                      this point badly and
                      sometimes made it worse
                      by creating tools that
                      doesn't always work and
                      the problem rises when
                      using proprietary drivers
                      for modern graphics card,
                      GNU/Linux has always
                      been the best OS in
                      performance until SphinUX
                      OS was created, the
                      performance varies as
                      usual from distribution to
                      another, it's satisfying
                      enough but it seems to be
                      a little bit slower when it
                      comes to the number of
                      applications running at the
                      same time, the Linux
                      kernel is becoming
                      resource hungry in the
                      latest releases and
                      requires more powerful
                      machines to run resource
                      demanding applications
                      with no lag
                      I don't even

                      edit: Nice kerning your libreoffice is doing there:

                      edit2: Is this an official statement ?
                      And could you maybe add robots.txt to so that google doesn't index all the packages?
                      Last edited by ChrisXY; 06-22-2013, 06:36 PM.