Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Jul 1998 10:38:50 -0400 (EDT) | From | John Alvord <> | Subject | Re: Memory Rusting Effect [re: Linux hostile to poverty] |
| |
On Mon, 20 Jul 1998, Raj Dutt wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, Andrej Presern wrote: > > > > > > > > Don't get me wrong - I'll make sure it works on an 8MB machine, but I > > > > won't consider it a showstopper if it is noticeably slower than 2.0.x on > > > > such a machine. > > > > > > Windows have been there, done that. And people decided they didn't like > > > it and went to Linux. History repeats? > > > > Raising the bar has to be done. Windows issn't so much about raising the > > bar, as of doing it _badly_ (and excessively, in the case of WinNT). > > At this point, ask ourselves.. is the role of Linux still in the rusty old PCs > inthe backroom? Or has the OS gained enough momentum and respect to start > to be commonly used in brand new, high end hardware. This is very relatedto how > much the bar should be raised. > Keeping it running on rusty old PCs has a significant benefit, *if* the programming effort isn't too high. When a system runs fine on low end machines it will fly on high end machines. Inefficiences that are masked on decent half-gig RAM machines are exposed and easily debugged on low end machines.
I have seen this process work in the Apple MacOS world, where developers keep around older/slower machines just for that purpose.
John Alvord
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |