Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

> David Kastrup belched:
>>
>> chrisv writes:
>>
>>> Seriously.  You're full of it, and you're wrong, Fuddie.  As usual, your
>>> FUD does not fly.
>>
>> I don't think he is wrong here.  

Well then, you're wrong, too.

>> Even if you know the details, you can't
>> tell what ratio of the slowness is attributable to inherent CDROM
>> access, what ratio is attributable to bad paging algorithms acerbated by
>> the CDROM (which would still have an impact when using hard disk), what
>> is attributable to a suboptimal storage layout and what is pure OS
>> creep.

Do you really think that "ratios of slowness" need to be calculated?
Sheesh, man, you're running off a CD.  You can hear it and see the
results.  You just throw-out the results of the "speed test" because
you're running off a freaking CDROM.  NO ONE is going to assume or
expect that the speed is _at all_ representative of what it's like
when it's running off HD.

Jeezez.  Most people aren't THAT stupid, much less 99% of them.

>> I am not exactly unversed with computers (having written my own
>> bootstrap loaders and BIOSes and target compilers and whatnot).  And
>> still I was quite unsure what difference to expect when installing
>> Knoppix on hard disk as compared to running from CD.

So?  Is it not reasonable to assume that a PC operating system would
be "reasonably responsive" when installed on a modern PC?

>> And yes, the impression "sluggish and basically not useful" can come
>> from a live CD.  

For the exceptionally dull-witted, maybe.  Most would recognize that
it's a limited trial, amazing in that it works at all!

>> It is nice for a look of _what_ you can do, but it is
>> hard to judge whether you would _want_ to do it in a reasonable
>> workflow.

Well, if one likes what one sees, one tries a full HD install and
system configuration.  Old (or new, for a price) spare HD's are
available, if one doesn't want to risk their Windows installation.