Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 07 Sep 2003 14:42:04 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy v12 |
| |
Martin J. Bligh wrote:
>>All of this basing scheduling performance on a bloated wannabe winamp >>makes as much sense as gauging car performance using a van. If this >>was a purely scheduling problem, then why do other players like >>alsaplayer and such not suck as bad as xmms when under the exact same >>priority and all? At least use something without a frontend so that >>you can limit the possibility that the programmers did something stupid >>like make decoding dependent on some update to the gui. >>xmms was coded first and foremost to look and work like winamp. >>Streamlined - even low latency performance was not a base goal. >> > >The reality is that people use xmms, and whilst it may not be the greatest >program known to man, I don't believe it's *that* fundamentally screwed up >that it should skip under normal desktop loads. *Especially* if it worked >fine under 2.4 ;-) >
I agree with Martin here. xmms may not be the smartest music player, but its really sad if it skips on a P4 or Athlon.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |