Why Linux is a so slow operating system?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Spartrekus

Spartrekus

Hello,

I am using NetBSD and FreeBSD, and time to time I have to use Debian at work and Fedora.

Linux is reacting so slow, and graphical applications are terribly slow (anything runs slow on Linux).
It might be getting closer to Android.

What are the possible reasons that Linux has little performances?

I would like to focus more on physics and tendency of a system to reach a change of entropy.
Those phenomena are likely related to how evolves naturally a system.

Feel Free to discuss.
 
Spartrekus said:
I am using NetBSD and FreeBSD, and time to time I have to use Debian at work and Fedora.

Linux is reacting so slow, and graphical applications are terribly slow (anything runs slow on Linux).
Click to expand...

As much as I prefer FreeBSD, there is no way in hell this is actually true. All this (graphical) stuff is developed on and optimized for Linux.

Spartrekus said:
I would like to focus more on physics and tendency of a system to reach a higher entropy.
Those phenomena are likely related to how evolves naturally a system.
Click to expand...

Huh? Is that supposed to be yet another of your Wayland vs X11 threads?
 
Of the 500 fastest computers in the world (*), all 500 run Linux. None run FreeBSD. They don't seem to have a problem with their entropy. The claim that "Linux is slow" is nonsensical.

(* Footnote: That's the fastest 500 that are publicly known about. I presume there might be other ones, in use by big businesses or national security agencies, which are actually faster, but not known. Those happen to also run Linux.)
 
Spartrekus said:
Linux is reacting so slow, and graphical applications are terribly slow
Click to expand...
First of all, you should compare apples to apples. Make a dual boot computer with the same set of programs and services installed in FreeBSD and Linux, especially the desktop environment.
Run simple benchmarks.
 
Both FreeBSD and GNU/Linux are plenty fast enough for most people's needs. Each has its advantages in different areas and I like to use both; it's good to have alternative ways of doing things. The spirit of FOSS is rooted in cooperation and sharing among colleagues; it doesn't always have to be a belly-bumping contest. I run the same applications using PostgreSQL, Apache, and PHP on both platforms and don't see much difference. Comparing PostgreSQL and MySQL on the other hand, I've seen such big differences in speed that I don't even bother with MySQL anymore.
 
That's depends on several variables since we are talking about Linux distributions. Give a try to Arch Linux and you will feel that different, or Gentoo.
 
I can slop together a Debian configuration and it will run pretty fast "out of the box," whereas I often have to fine-tune my FreeBSD configurations in order to get them to run at comparable speeds. I believe it's worth it to gain the flexibility FreeBSD has to offer. Plus, during the process of fine-tuning the system, I gain a better understanding of the way things work.
 
ralphbsz said:
Of the 500 fastest computers in the world (*), all 500 run Linux. None run FreeBSD. They don't seem to have a problem with their entropy. The claim that "Linux is slow" is nonsensical.

(* Footnote: That's the fastest 500 that are publicly known about. I presume there might be other ones, in use by big businesses or national security agencies, which are actually faster, but not known. Those happen to also run Linux.)
Click to expand...


Definition is matter. How it is defined matters.
Linux takes huge amount of resources (compared to earliest BSD machine) over the time or decades.
That's fast right? https://pastebin.com/raw/41nhSwdS

Let's look at physics to explain it...
 
I run Fedora on my 2 main workstations. When there is a new FreeBSD release I install it on the same machines. I use exactly the same software (XFCE, compilers, multimedia, photography) between Linux and FreeBSD, so comparison should be fair. On Linux everything is default, on FreeBSD I use desktop settings as suggested on some sites like cooltrainer. I don't run benchmarks, just some subjective observations. FreeBSD on ZFS is definitely slower than Linux. With UFS FreeBSD becomes about the same as Linux. Some operations like switching between programs feel snappier on FreeBSD, but some like copying a lot of large files seem to be faster on Linux (ext4). After playing with FreeBSD for a few weeks I usually get tired of small problems here and there and go back to Fedora. Even if FreeBSD is designed better than Linux the latter has so much more resources for development and testing that it shows for the end user.
 
Now that someone brings the theme about Meltdown and Spectre, I want to ask to you: what about FreeBSD and those viruses? The most resistant OS that I know is RHEL, which have a level of 5 of security, according to what I read. In the another Linux, well...the level of security is unknown. It is difficult to explain why. But I never read about FreeBSD and its level of security in both cases.
 
Spartrekus said:
Let's look at physics to explain it...
Click to expand...
As a physicist, I would look at code. Physicists, before drawing conclusions and trying to come up with an explanation, make carefully designed experiments and expose their method so others can reproduce it. I see none of that in your post. If this is just to rant about Linux, I would rather want to see this thread closed.
 
Spartrekus said:
Linux is reacting so slow, and graphical applications are terribly slow (anything runs slow on Linux).
It might be getting closer to Android.

What are the possible reasons that Linux has little performances?
Click to expand...
Quite a general statement! My experience is very different, I run Linux kernel on some of my machines and the GUI behaves very very well.
Apparently you have experienced performance issues but this is not necessarily due to Linux. It might be caused by the hardware or a driver, or a misconfiguration.

Maybe it would pay off if you asked in the distro's forums about your specific hardware and driver versions.
 
I hate Linux threads are quite popular here. They often go on for 3 or 4 pages. Sort of like when Linux was not well known and the I hate Microsoft threads were popular. Maybe it's because I'm old and doddering, but it always reminds me of little dogs barking at big ones.
 
Spartrekus said:
Linux takes huge amount of resources (compared to earliest BSD machine) over the time or decades.
Click to expand...
It depends. Linux is a kernel and you can configure it to take whatever resources you wish. Some distros have decided to offer stock kernel that is quite heavy and use systemd AND start a bunch of services like printing and Samba network browsing by default but again, this is not Linux'es fault.
It would be more acurate to write "Distro XYZ takes huge amount of resources in its default configuration".
 
scottro said:
I hate Linux threads are quite popular here. They often go on for 3 or 4 pages. Sort of like when Linux was not well known and the I hate Microsoft threads were popular. Maybe it's because I'm old and doddering, but it always reminds me of little dogs barking at big ones.
Click to expand...
It's understandable. The OS-es are similar and it's natural to compare them. Where I agree with you is that when an OS starts becoming mainstream and people start using it massively, this invites also troubles - it becomes a more attractive target for crackers and virus writers. But as long as the code is public, this should be manageable.
 
aragats said:
First of all, you should compare apples to apples. Make a dual boot computer with the same set of programs and services installed in FreeBSD and Linux, especially the desktop environment.
Run simple benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Even then one needs to make sure that the graphic drivers are configured identically. It's actually quite difficult to compare apples to apples.
The only sure way is to profile the kernel and proove that the kernel itself consumes more time and resources compared to another kernel in the same setup.
 
hukadan said:
As a physicist, I would look at code. Physicists, before drawing conclusions and trying to come up with an explanation, make carefully designed experiments and expose their method so others can reproduce it. I see none of that in your post. If this is just to rant about Linux, I would rather want to see this thread closed.
Click to expand...

See first post.
What about Entropy?
 
Spartrekus said:
See first post.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I can't find any link to a bench mark where you detail the measurements you made to draw your conclusion. Could you point me to it ?
Spartrekus said:
What about Entropy?
Click to expand...
Indeed, what about the entropy ? But the entropy of what ? Is it a closed, open or isolated system ? If we assume an isolated/closed system, what are the limits of this assumption ? Are we in those limits ? Close to them ? Entropy is a complicated subject and I fail to see where you want to go with this thread (and others you have already opened).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top