this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
940 points (94.0% liked)

Technology

59554 readers
3910 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Should just use Linux, tbh.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip 31 points 7 months ago (4 children)

This is what I've been saying for years. Windows 11 is a big step backwards for performance.

I have a beefy laptop with W11 and a Ryzen 9 5900HX and 32GB RAM and a high end SSD, but the start menu takes up to a full second to open, the File manager takes 2-3 seconds to open and 1 second to "work on" the directory I entered, task manager takes like 5 seconds now, and sometimes my CPU randomly spikes to 80+ degrees C while the desktop is idle.

On Ubuntu (not known for being lightweight, quite the contrary in the Linux world), there is extremely minimal lag and basic system functions are near instant. I'd use it more if the WiFi was more reliable (my average packet loss is 39% in some frequently visited areas where Windows doesn't struggle at all)

Also, for work I used a W10 desktop with a i7-8700K CPU and random SSD, and nothing in the OS lagged or was unresponsive. File manager was nearly instant, even when the system was hit with significant load elsewhere.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 15 points 7 months ago

At work I have your standard corporate Dell laptop running Microsoft 365. I run Linux in a VM to do my work and it’s pretty funny how responsive it is compared with the host OS running on the actual hardware. Funny in a sad way, really.

And this is still on windows 10, not even updated to 11 yet.

[–] hardaker@programming.dev 10 points 7 months ago

My mother in law's laptop was getting slower and slower and finally went BSOD with a memory error. She was going to toss it but I suggested trying Ubuntu first because all she did was in a web browser anyway . Installed. Ran fine. For 6 more years.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Win10 is the same these days.

When it launched it was lauded for having similar system requirements to Win7, and was easier to run than 8/8.1, but it just got more and more bloated over time as MS transitioned from a "sell Windows for a profit" business model to a "sell Windows for a profit and collect as much personal information and show as many ads as we can get away with for profit" business model.

Imagine what Microsoft could be achieving if they actually gave the slightest shit about actually improving their product? Windows could be amazing. But it isn't.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Windows 10 got a new kernel that was unquestionably better than the previous ones. This meant that even though it was a step backwards in some ways from Windows 7 (and 8 isn't even worth mention), it was capable of better performance.

I've asked a few times if anyone can give any good reasons for switching to 11 from 10 other than "it's newer" or "ms is sunsetting win10" and have yet to see a compelling response. Virtual desktop support is the best answer so far, but I had that on Windows 20 years ago with litestep (I think that's what it was called, it was an alternate desktop program).

It seems that Microsoft has just decided that they are going to throw their market dominance and reputation (which for some reason is good in the business and government world) around rather than offer good products.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

uhm, i believe win 11 has a better scheduler. It schedules more efficiently. That's the one argument i've heard in favor of win11.

[–] Infinitus@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think that it's scheduler is better for those Intel bigLittle CPUs

that could be it. I never asked, the person that relayed that says it was significant enough for win11 to run faster than win10 for them. No idea how much i trust them on that one though.

[–] Tag365@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (3 children)

What are the lightweight Linux distributions?

[–] SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip 6 points 7 months ago

There are multiple tiers of lightweight.

"Middleweight": Something like Kubuntu, Xubuntu, or anything with KDE or XFCE, or MATE

More lightweight: Lubuntu, anything with LXQt

Super lightweight: AntiX, something with Trinity Desktop Environment or just a window manager instead of a full desktop environment

Most lightweight: Just a command line with no GUI (barebones Arch maybe?)

[–] GnuLinuxDude@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

Compared to windows 11 all of them are

if you really want to hit minimalist in terms of linux environments, WMs are the way to go. They strip all the fluff from a DE and only give you the bare essentials. Everything else is something you bring, which honestly, not as big of a problem as you would think.