Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: vallor Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-11 Subject: Re: How To Speed Startup Of Microsoft Office? Have It Running All The Time! Date: 29 Mar 2025 13:14:54 GMT Lines: 59 Message-ID: References: <6vidujd9u5ruhm8b85o52njfjghgoah65a@4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net t1EWB4IAYJMG8eGyfJswIQI0yaS6iUCff0mFARR7i86TeVygLC Cancel-Lock: sha1:/fFl6xVrfBfg7jZumYGEA54bsf8= sha256:Uh3Dl6ayuwCycZjsZMDz7fG/sVc2e25UnPv3LJI2lAI= X-Face: +McU)#<-H?9lTb(Th!zR`EpVrp<0)1p5CmPu.kOscy8LRp_\u`:tW;dxPo./(fCl CaKku`)]}.V/"6rISCIDP` User-Agent: Pan/0.162 (Hmm4; 21cd653e; Linux-6.14.0) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:688371 alt.comp.os.windows-11:18052 On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 01:08:30 -0400, Paul wrote in : > On Fri, 3/28/2025 5:25 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> Linux can use memory for filesystem cache that can be quickly dumped >> and reallocated for regular application use. This is why the memory >> display distinguishes between “free” memory and “available” memory -- >> the latter includes both free memory and cache space. >> >> Windows isn’t so good at this, let’s face it. >> >> > I don't know if the message is getting through yet, > but Windows has every feature Linux has. I agree with almost everything you say, Paul, but if what you say in this last sentence is the case, one wonders why Linux is available as a subsystem under Windows? For that matter, why does Azure run on Azure Linux, a Microsoft-designed Linux distribution, rather than Windows Server? But! I think Lawrence is getting ahead of himself -- for general user applications, Windows is fine with regard to performance -- it's the other matters that give one pause for thought, such as (for example) privacy and ads. > Why do you think they hired > 7000 developers ? They're running Xerox machines all day long. the task > bar descends just like MacOS. What a coincidence. > > Windows has System Read cache and System Write cache. > It has System Read cache in Win2K. System Write cache came later. > > The System Read cache is like every other implementation. > Unix had it, MacOS had it (on my G4 in 10.3), Linux has it, > Windows has it (since Win2K at least). At the time this happened, all > the OS companies were running their Xerox machines and copying shit from > one another. In all of them, > memory is not booked, and as Frank would note, "memory is to be used", > and the ideal case happens with System Read caches, on all systems. They > give the memory back, any time you need it. > > System Write caches are booked. And they have percentage limits on how > much memory they will book. System Write caches are a non-ideal case, > and if you're good, you can "jam" an OS such that it freezes. I managed > to do that once, realized the mistake I'd made, but I couldn't type fast > enough to stop it :-/ OS froze. Had to reboot. > > Use a little imagination please. Come out of your cave. > > Paul -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti OS: Linux 6.14.0 Release: Mint 22.1 Mem: 258G "I'm not fat, just horizontally disproportionate."