On 7/28/2012 10:27 PM, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote: > > On 07/25/2012 12:10 PM, Richard Vickery wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Reindl Harald >> <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Am 24.07.2012 19 <tel:24.07.2012%2019>:39, schrieb Richard >> Vickery: >>> Why do you need to reboot? What are you doing at power-off that >> you need to hang around and wait for it? If a >>> portable computer, just close it, pack it away before the lights >> go out, and walk away? and is a minute and 38 >>> seconds really SO important? If this minuscule amount time is so >> important, you could retire and get more of your >>> minute and a half. >> >> strange argumentation >> >> it does not matter WHY someone reboots a machine nor is not reboot >> a solution for any problem >> >> rebooting a remote-machine after updates which is not important >> enough to set up remote KVM as example is not funny if you have to >> wait a long time without feedback >> >> >> My point here is taken out of out of its context: it was not >> rebooting I was concerned about, but that the world is not going to >> end in a minute and a half. Included in my concern were many >> things: one was to get someone with more knowledge than I to help >> this gentleman - I have stated before that I am a political >> scientist, not a real one (sorry if I offend any other political >> scientists here, that is not my purpose); another concern is that >> when I used MS stuff, I was concerned and fearful about a longer >> wait periods because of their crashing occurrences, and in Linux >> waiting is no big deal because Linux does what it is supposed to do >> versus MS Windows which teaches an individual to freak out when the >> computer does something like that in question; another concern is >> that I am, and cannot un-become over-night, nor would I want to, a >> qigong master who doesn't worry about time - and this is why mine >> is, as Harald says, a "strange argument"; everything the qigong >> practitioner is, is strange to those who don't practice. >> >> Best regards, >> >> > I too would be concerned with a long shut-down time.....only because, > as stated before when using Windows the longer an application or > computer takes to shut down could mean all KINDS of things are taking > place that are unknown to the user. From viruses and trojan files > being installed......to the hard drive being deleted a byte at a > time. If there's one thing I've learned to do with Linux it's that > every two weeks I run BleachBit and this seems to keep my system > pretty fast. Shutdowns and startups are quick, and free of glitches. > I'm running Fedora 16 on a 32 bit 3GM memory laptop and for what I > need it to do....it's pretty fast. I'm in the process of upgrading my > hardware to 64-bit, and I'm wondering just how much more of an > increase in speed that will give my system, when I go to Fedora > 17.....and this is in addition to making sure my Firewall is on and > working! > > > EGO II > > "the longer an application or computer takes to shut down could mean all KINDS of things are taking place..."? Really? References? Documentation? Facts? Instead of 'What I think I know' and can not prove. -- David -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
