SEO

Why is Suse 9.s so slow compared to Mandrake 10.1?
I migrated from Mandrake to Suse because I had heard good things about it
but my experience is the oppposite, suse is very slow and seems to be
riddled with bugs.
I am greatful for one thing and that is I didn't pay anything for this
garbage.
Suse should forget about trying to be everything to everyone and at least
release a version of Linux that works.
Back to Mandrake for me.
Chedda

Amarnaut Chedda wrote:


> Suse should forget about trying to be everything to everyone and at least
> release a version of Linux that works.

Suse is for smart people who know what their doing.

Obviously they figured out a way to weed you out.


--
Language is a virus from outer space.
--William S. Burroughs

Amarnaut Chedda wrote:

> Why is Suse 9.s so slow compared to Mandrake 10.1?
> I migrated from Mandrake to Suse because I had heard good things about it
> but my experience is the oppposite, suse is very slow and seems to be
> riddled with bugs.
> I am greatful for one thing and that is I didn't pay anything for this
> garbage.
> Suse should forget about trying to be everything to everyone and at least
> release a version of Linux that works.
> Back to Mandrake for me.
> Chedda

Dear flat fish,
Try pre-linking for speed.
The problem is that you need to be replaced by a trained techie.
Please resign and let management choose better staff to replace you.

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 23:56:42 +0000, 7 wrote:

> Amarnaut Chedda wrote:
>
>> Why is Suse 9.s so slow compared to Mandrake 10.1?
>> I migrated from Mandrake to Suse because I had heard good things about it
>> but my experience is the oppposite, suse is very slow and seems to be
>> riddled with bugs.
>> I am greatful for one thing and that is I didn't pay anything for this
>> garbage.
>> Suse should forget about trying to be everything to everyone and at least
>> release a version of Linux that works.
>> Back to Mandrake for me.
>> Chedda
>
> Dear flat fish,
> Try pre-linking for speed.
> The problem is that you need to be replaced by a trained techie.
> Please resign and let management choose better staff to replace you.

I am not understanding you. How does your answer explain why Mandrake is
so much faster than Suse. I did not do a thing to Mandrake, or Suse for
that matter. What is a flatfish?

Amarnaut Chedda wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 23:56:42 +0000, 7 wrote:
>
>> Amarnaut Chedda wrote:
>>
>>> Why is Suse 9.s so slow compared to Mandrake 10.1?
>>> I migrated from Mandrake to Suse because I had heard good things about
>>> it but my experience is the oppposite, suse is very slow and seems to be
>>> riddled with bugs.
>>> I am greatful for one thing and that is I didn't pay anything for this
>>> garbage.
>>> Suse should forget about trying to be everything to everyone and at
>>> least release a version of Linux that works.
>>> Back to Mandrake for me.
>>> Chedda
>>
>> Dear flat fish,
>> Try pre-linking for speed.
>> The problem is that you need to be replaced by a trained techie.
>> Please resign and let management choose better staff to replace you.
>
> I am not understanding you. How does your answer explain why Mandrake is
> so much faster than Suse. I did not do a thing to Mandrake, or Suse for
> that matter. What is a flatfish?

Signorita, flat fish is a fishy meal served flat side up with tartar sauce.

Yum yum.

No I can't supply you with information about Mandrake v. Suse unless you
post some test results like how long it took to copy a 100Mb file for
instance.

7 wrote:
>
> Amarnaut Chedda wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 23:56:42 +0000, 7 wrote:
> >
> >> Amarnaut Chedda wrote:
> >>
> >>> Why is Suse 9.s so slow compared to Mandrake 10.1?
> >>> I migrated from Mandrake to Suse because I had heard good things about
> >>> it but my experience is the oppposite, suse is very slow and seems to be
> >>> riddled with bugs.
> >>> I am greatful for one thing and that is I didn't pay anything for this
> >>> garbage.
> >>> Suse should forget about trying to be everything to everyone and at
> >>> least release a version of Linux that works.
> >>> Back to Mandrake for me.
> >>> Chedda
> >>
> >> Dear flat fish,
> >> Try pre-linking for speed.
> >> The problem is that you need to be replaced by a trained techie.
> >> Please resign and let management choose better staff to replace you.
> >
> > I am not understanding you. How does your answer explain why Mandrake is
> > so much faster than Suse. I did not do a thing to Mandrake, or Suse for
> > that matter. What is a flatfish?
>
> Signorita, flat fish is a fishy meal served flat side up with tartar sauce.
>
> Yum yum.
>
> No I can't supply you with information about Mandrake v. Suse unless you
> post some test results like how long it took to copy a 100Mb file for
> instance.

If you want to execute performance tests, execute bonnie++ a couple of
times on each distro. That will give you an idea of performanace:
perceived vs. real.

Joe
--
#----------------------------------------------------------#
# Penguinix Consulting #
#----------------------------------------------------------#
# Software development, QA and testing. #
# Linux support and training. #
# "Don't fear the penguin!" #
#----------------------------------------------------------#
# Registered Linux user: #309247 http://counter.li.org #
#----------------------------------------------------------#

Amarnaut Chedda wrote:

> Why is Suse 9.s so slow compared to Mandrake 10.1?
> I migrated from Mandrake to Suse because I had heard good things about it
> but my experience is the oppposite, suse is very slow and seems to be
> riddled with bugs.
> I am greatful for one thing and that is I didn't pay anything for this
> garbage.
> Suse should forget about trying to be everything to everyone and at least
> release a version of Linux that works.
> Back to Mandrake for me.
> Chedda
I was running Mandrake 10.1. However, it would not handle my wireless card,
so I changed to Suse9.2.
Extremely slow - it is like running on the CD version of Mandrake.
I am thinking of buying the wireless card supported by Mandrake and going
back to it.

I am a very happy SuSE user. I am also a regular user. I actually use
my machine as opposed to those who are perfectly happy installing an OS
and screwing with it until they decide they want to move on with
something else to screw with. I paid for my peice of garbage as well.
It is definately faster than the versions of Fedora Core and Redhat
that I was running before. My games and videos are absolutely
beautiful since I recieved that upgrade for my Raedon as well. (Thank
you for the suggestion) The only thing I've had problems with is
installing certain things. But the second try always worked. Didn't
have to fiddle with anything. I think that the best thing about it is
ease of use. I really wish I had started with SuSE instead of RedHat.
I'd probably be a lot farther in my understanding of Linux.

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 23:50:27 +0000, John Bailo wrote:

> Amarnaut Chedda wrote:
>
>
>> Suse should forget about trying to be everything to everyone and at least
>> release a version of Linux that works.
>
> Suse is for smart people who know what their doing.
^
they're

>
> Obviously they figured out a way to weed you out.

If theres a post to multiple groups including comp.os.linux.advocacy, its a
troll.

gtoomey